IBzty 

,//3 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 






The Towner-Sterling Bill 



An Analysis of the Provisions of the 
Bill; A Discussion of the Princi- 
ples and Policies Involved; And a 
Presentation of FACTS AND 
FIGURES Relating to the Subject 



Legislative Commission Series No. 3 



The National Education Association 

1201 Sixteenth Street Northwest 

Washington, D. C. 

September, 1922 



FOREWORD 

This discussion of the Towner-Sterling bill was 
prepared for the National Education Association by 
Mr. Hugh S. Magill, Field Secretary; Mr. John 
K. Norton, Director of Research; Dr. J. A. H. 
Keith, President, State Normal School, Indiana, 
Pennsylvania; and Mr. William H. Bixby, Secre- 
tary of the National Committee for a Department 
of Education, Boston, Massachusetts, with the ad- 
vice and assistance of the Chairman and members 
of the Legislative Commission of the National Edu- 
cation Association. 



Document Di 
QCT * '9?S 



<u 



LB L%hi> 



.N 



i 



CONTENTS 

I. Fundamental issues involved 5 

II. What the bill provides and what it does not provide 11 

III. Brief history of the bill 13 

IV. The creation of a Department of Education 17 

A. From the standpoint of the historic development of the 

Executive Departments of the Government 17 

B. From the standpoint of effective administration of the 

Nation's present participation in education 18 

C. From the standpoint of the need of recognized leader- 

ship in public education 20 

V. The extension of the principle of Federal aid for the promotion 

of education 25 

A. Removing illiteracy 27 

B. Americanizing the foreign-born 34 

C. Establishing effective programs of physical education 38 

D. Providing well-qualified teachers for all public schools.. 44 

E. Equalizing educational opportunity 51 

VI. The relationship of the Federal Government to the States as set 
up in the Towner-Sterling bill — Objections to the bill stated 

and answered 57 

VII. Appendix — Complete text of Towner-Sterling bill 71 



THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES INVOLVED 

A discussion of the provisions of the Towner-Sterling Bill involves the 
consideration of the following questions : 

First. Should the Federal Government increase the effective operation 
of its existing educational activities by unifying them in a Department of 
Education under a Secretary of Education, and thereby give new sanction 
and recognized leadership to American public education ? 

Second. Should the Federal Government extend the established princi- 
ples of Federal aid to the States for the promotion of education to encourage 
and assist the States to remedy certain recognized educational defects exist- 
ing quite generally throughout the country? 

Third. Should the conduct and management of public education remain 
exclusively under State control ? 

The supporters of the Bill believe that wise public policy demands that 
each of these three questions should be answered in the affirmative. 

Opposition Based on False Assumptions 

Those who have opposed the creation of a Department of Education 
and further participation of the Federal Government in the promotion of 
public education base their objections primarily on the assumption that 
such participation means Federal control of education within the States. 
They will not concede that the National Government can cooperate with 
the States in promoting an interest of the highest importance to both State 
and Nation. They refuse to recognize that such cooperation has been 
carried on, and is now being carried on successfully. They declare that 
those who favor the establishment of a Department of Education, and the 
extension of the principle of Federal aid to the States for the promotion 
of education, would transfer the responsibility for the support and control 
of public education from the State and local communities within the 
State, to the Federal Government, and place the school systems of all the 
States under a vicious bureaucratic control. 

We maintain that these assumptions are without foundation. They can 
be maintained only by imputing motives that do not exist to those who 
favor extension of Federal participation in the promotion of education, and 
by refusing to give proper consideration to past experiences and to consti- 
tutional and statutory provisions prohibiting Federal control. 

Constitution Forbids Federal Control 

It is conceded that our Federal Government can exercise only such 
powers as are delegated to it by the United States Constitution or clearly 
implied therein ; that the Constitution does not give to the Federal Govern- 
men or to Congress the control or management of public education within 
the States ; and that the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution expressly 
provides that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Con- 

[5] 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



stitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States 
respectively, or to the people." The recent decision of the Supreme Court 
declaring invalid the Child Labor Law gives added emphasis to this pro- 
vision of the Constitution. Those who favor the extension of Federal 
participation in education clearly recognize these facts. The proposed 
measure which they advocate would embody in statute law the clearest 
possible declaration of the authority of the States to manage and control 
their public-school systems. 

Why Such Unreasonable Assertions 

Under these conditions it is difficult to understand why the opponents 
of the further participation of the Federal Government in the promotion 
of education should persist in declaring that such participation will mean 
"a great bureaucratic machine at Washington, with three-quarters of a 
million of Federal employees teaching in the schools and bossed by several 
thousand field inspectors, supervisors, and other petty traveling officials." 
We insist that such assumptions and imaginings are absolutely unjustified. 
Starting with a false hypothesis and basing their arguments on false assump- 
tions, they would lead us to believe that those who favor Federal promotion 
of education would either ignorantly or wilfully bring about conditions 
disastrous to our free institutions. 

Extent and Character of Support 

We find earnestly supporting this proposition to establish a Department 
of Education and extend the principle of Federal aid for the promotion of 
education, an overwhelming majority of these engaged in the work of 
public education — State superintendents, county superintendents, normal 
school presidents, city superintendents, and classroom teachers throughout 
the country. It is also earnestly supported by many national organizations 
that are friends of public education. Among these organizations may be 
named the National Education Association, which represents the profes- 
sional organization of the educators of the country, and which has repeat- 
edly endorsed this proposition. Among the women's organizations actively 
supporting it are the General Federation of Women's Clubs, the National 
League of Women Voters, the Daughters of the American Revolution, 
the National Congress of Mothers and Parent-Teachers Associations, the 
National Council of Jewish Women, the National Woman's Christian 
Temperance Union, and the Woman's Relief Corps. The proposition 
also has the unqualified support of the American Federation of Labor. 
Great religious forces such as the International Sunday School Council of 
Religious Education have given the proposition their endorsement, and it is 
also supported by a number of fraternal organizations that are particularly 
friendly to the promotion of public education, among which may be named 
the Supreme Council of Scottish Rite Masonry for the Southern Jurisdiction 
of the United States. Finally, the National Committee for a Department 



Fundamental Issues Involved 



of Education, made up of a number of leading public-spirited citizens, rep- 
resenting various professional and business interests, is giving effective sup- 
port to the cause. 

Forces Opposing the Proposition 

To say that the officers and members of these great organizations would 
violate the Constitution of the United States and either ignorantly or 
deliberately bring about Federal bureaucratic control of education within 
the States, is an attempt on the part of a few to indict the motives and the 
judgment of millions of intelligent patriotic citizens. It is only fair 
that attention be called to the forces which are opposing the proposi- 
tion to further extend Federal aid for the promotion of education. We 
find this opposition comes primarily from the representatives of private 
and parochial schools, and a few great privately endowed institutions. 
We believe it may truthfully be said that the proposition is quite gen- 
erally supported by those who are interested primarily in public educa- 
tion, and are essentially public-school minded, and opposed by a limited 
number of those who represent privately supported and privately endowed 
institutions. It is significant, however, that the departments of education 
in privately endowed universities, which are in touch with the problems 
of public education, generally support the proposition. 

Opposition Pictures Tyranny of Free Government 

It is astonishing to note the extremes to which the opponents of this prop- 
osition have gone in undertaking to picture in their imagination the dire 
consequences which will follow the further participation of the Federal 
Government in the promotion of education. They would frighten us into 
thinking that Federal participation means Federal control, and that Federal 
control must end in the destruction of our liberties. In frantic appeal we 
are called upon as American citizens to save ourselves from the tyranny 
and usurpation of our own Government,, which, we are warned, is develop- 
ing conditions "that will put to shame the best efforts of the government of 
the Czar of all the Russias when in the heyday of its glory." A tyranny 
worse than that of the Czar ! A terrible indictment, if it were true. But 
we still have faith in our National Government and refuse to be frightened 
by this terrible warning of impending tyranny. We have confidence that 
our Nation will continue to be what it has been from the beginning, a 
Government of the people and by the people; and since it is the people's 
own Government, the people may well have greater faith in its leadership 
than in leadership furnished by private institutions, endowed and supported 
by great private interests. 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Opponents Set Up Autocratic Secretary 

Those who oppose the creation of a Department of Education with a 
Secretary in the President's Cabinet would continue their policy of fright- 
fulness by picturing in their wild flights of imagination the horrible spec- 
tacle of a Secretary of Education, actuated by base political motives, corrupt- 
ing the youth of the country through such wicked influences as he might 
be able to exert through the school systems of the several States. Such 
assumptions are too ridiculous to impress any serious-minded person. Any 
President might reasonably be expected to be particularly careful in the se- 
lection of a Secretary of Education. The occupant of this position of great 
responsibility must stand out prominently before the people, his every act 
and recommendation subject to public analysis and criticism. To begin 
to do some of the things that have been suggested he might do, would bring 
instant and general rebuke from the people, without regard to political 
affiliations. As one United States Senator remarked, "To undertake to 
play politics in this position would be the poorest kind of politics." But 
why should anyone impune the motives of a Secretary of Education in 
advance? Is it any more just or reasonable than to condemn in advance 
the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of Commerce? To refuse 
to establish leadership and delegate authority because of such imaginary 
fears would make impossible the realization of the highest purposes of 
free government. 

No One Advocating Federal Control 

Who is advocating Federal control of education? Certainly not those 
who are supporting the proposition to establish a Department of Education 
and extend the established principle of Federal aid for the promotion of 
education. They are the ones who are most strongly opposed to Federal 
control of education within the States. What they seek is Federal aid 
and cooperation with the States in developing a stronger, better trained, 
more intelligent American citizenship. Is it reasonable to suppose that 
State Superintendents would wish to turn over to the Federal Government 
their rights and prerogatives? And yet State superintendents favor this 
proposition because they recognize the advantages which have come from 
Federal cooperation with the States in the past, and the still greater ad- 
vantages which will be derived from the further extension of this principle. 

Proposition Based on Established Principles 

There is nothing new in this proposition. It has been thoroughly tried 
out and found absolutely sound in principle and practice. Other depart- 
ments have been established to cooperate with the States in promoting in- 
terests of National importance. The Department of Agriculture was 
created in response to a demand from the agricultural interests of the 
country, not to control agriculture but for the promotion of agriculture, 



Fundamental Issues Involved 



and the benefits which have resulted therefrom are apparent. The Depart- 
ment of Labor was created at the request of the labor interests of the 
country, not to control labor but to promote the interests of labor, and 
no one can show that Federal domination has followed. The Department 
of Commerce was created at the request of the commercial interests of the 
country for the promotion of commerce. The good which this department 
has accomplished is well known. Why deny to public education for its 
welfare and promotion a similar recognition ? 

Many Precedents for Federal Aid 

The Federal Government has cooperated with the States in the pro- 
motion of education from the founding of our Nation. Common schools 
have been promoted by grants of land and money from the Federal Gov- 
ernment. Colleges of agriculture and mechanic arts were founded by 
land-grants given by the Federal Government and are today aided by 
grants of money from the Federal treasury. Agricultural education is en- 
couraged and promoted by the cooperation of the Federal Government 
with the States under the Smith-Lever Act, and vocational education is 
similarly promoted under the Smith-Hughes Act. 

Causes of Friction Eliminated 

Any friction that has arisen in the administration of these Acts has come 
from the fact that they authorize too much detailed supervision. These 
defects have been remedied in the Towner-Sterling Bill under which it is 
proposed to extend the principle of Federal aid. While there is preserved 
to the Federal Government the unquestioned right to audit the expendi- 
ture of such funds as may be apportioned to the States for the specific pur- 
poses named, and while certain general and very reasonable statutory 
requirements are set up which must be complied with by the States in order 
to receive the Federal grants, all details of organization, supervision and 
control are reserved to the States, to be carried on under State law by the 
State and local educational authorities of the several States. 



WHAT THE BILL PROVIDES AND WHAT IT DOES 
NOT PROVIDE 

Let us consider what the Towner-Sterling Bill provides and what it does 
not provide. The complete text of the bill is given as an appendix to 
this pamphlet. It is its own best defense. All who are interested in the 
question of the further participation of the Federal Government in the 
promotion of public education should read this bill and weigh carefully 
its provisions. It has been grossly misrepresented. In published articles 
and public addresses it has been declared to provide what it specifically 
prohibits. Those who would know its provisions are urged not to accept 
the unsupported statements of its enemies, but to read it and form their 
own conclusions. 

Embodies Two Fundamental Principles 

The Towner-Sterling Bill embodies two fundamental principles. First, 
it creates a Department of Education under a Secretary of Education who 
shall be a member of the President's Cabinet; and second, it authorizes 
appropriations to be distributed to the States to aid and encourage the 
States in (a) the removal of illiteracy, (b) the Americanization of the 
foreign-born, (c) the promotion of physical education and health service, 
(d) the training of teachers, and (e) the equalization of educational oppor- 
tunities within their several borders. 

State Control Carefully Preserved 

The Bill is drawn in careful recognition of the fact that the control and 
management of public education within the States is exclusively a function 
of the respective States, to be carried on under State laws. The Bill does 
not establish Federal control of education. On the contrary, it forbids 
Federal control in most specific terms, and preserves to each State the abso- 
lute control of its educational system. It provides: 

That all the educational facilities encouraged by the provisions of this Act and 
accepted by a State shall be organized, supervised, and administered exclusively 
by the legally constituted State and local educational authorities of said State, and 
the Secretary of Education shall exercise no authority in relation thereto; and this 
Act shall not be construed to imply Federal control of education within the States, 
nor to impair the freedom of the States in the conduct and management of their 
respective school systems. (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 13.) 

Creates National Council of Education 

The Bill provides for National leadership in education through the 
creation of a National Council of Education composed of the State Super- 
intendents or Commissioners of Education of all the States, and in addi- 
tion twenty-five educators and twenty-five laymen to be appointed by the 
Secretary of Education, "to consult with the Secretary of Education on 
subjects relating to the promotion and development of education in the 
United States." (Ibid., Sec. 17.) 

[11] 



12 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Secretary Not Given Mandatory Power 

The Secretary of Education is not given mandatory power, nor does the 
Bill permit him to establish any executive standards. The influence of the 
Federal Government, under the provisions of this measure, must be exer- 
cised only through the persuasiveness of facts and suggestions emanating 
from a source of recognized leadership. 

No Fixed Appropriation Authorized 

The Towner-Sterling Bill does not appropriate one dollar. It author- 
izes the appropriation of certain sums to encourage the States in the pro- 
motion of education for the five specific purposes named in the Bill, but 
in each case, after the amount specified, is the phrase, "or so much thereof 
as may be necessary." This leaves it entirely to the judgment of Congress 
to determine the amount which may be appropriated each year for the 
different purposes named, but, at the same time, the Bill fixes upper limits, 
beyond which Congress cannot go, unless and until the Act is amended in 
due form. 

Provides No Federal Inspectors or Supervisors 

The Bill does not provide for a single field inspector, supervisor or other 
Federal officer within the States. The only officials provided for in the 
Bill are the Secretary of Education, an Assistant Secretary of Education, 
a Chief Clerk, a Disbursing Clerk, and "such chiefs of bureaus and clerical 
assistants as may from time to time be authorized by Congress." But these 
are all to be in the department at Washington. Under the provisions of 
this Bill there will be no occasion for Federal employes in the States, as 
the Bill provides that "All funds apportioned- to a State (for the several 
purposes named ) , shall be distributed and administered in accordance with 
the laws of said State, . . . and the State and local educational au- 
thorities of said State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and meth- 
ods for carrying out the purposes (of the several apportionments) within 
said State in accordance with the laws thereof." {Ibid., sections 7, 8, 9, 
10, and 11.) 

The proposals embodied in the Towner-Sterling Bill are not new. Edu- 
cational authorities have for years recognized the need of a Federal De- 
partment of Education to provide National leadership in education. The 
National Education Association went on record in favor of the establish- 
ment of such a Department more than fifty years ago, and it has over and 
over reaffirmed its endorsement of this position. Federal aid to the States 
for the promotion of education has been practiced since the beginning of 
our Government. The Towner-Sterling Bill would extend this principle 
to meet certain conditions and correct certain defects that have become 
more apparent during the past few years. 



BRIEF HISTORY OF THE BILL 

The recent World War emphasized the shortcomings and defects, as 
well as the excellencies and strengths of the public-school systems of our 
several States. As never before the people became aware of the prevalence 
and extent of illiteracy, of non-English-speaking aliens and foreign settle- 
ments in our midst, of physical defects which might be remedied, of poorly 
qualified and inadequately paid teachers, and of glaring inequalities in edu- 
cational opportunities throughout the country. Each of these defects was 
seen to have a damaging influence on our successful prosecution of the war. 
The situation was described in a war-born term as an "emergency," but 
it existed before the war, and it still exists. It calls for remedy from the 
standpoint of the individual, the community, the State, and the Nation, 
because these educational defects are as disastrous to the individual, the 
community, the State, and the Nation in times of peace as they are in times 
of war. 

Realizing its responsibility to the Nation — a responsibility growing out 
of its intimate acquaintance with these educational defects — the National 
Education Association in February, 1918, appointed a "Commission on the 
Emergency in Education." This Commission was aware of the fact that 
the sovereign right and power to organize, supervise, and administer pub- 
lic education in the several States is vested in the States under the provisions 
of the Federal Constitution. The Commission was also aware of the fact 
that the Federal Government has aided public education in the several 
States during its entire existence. This policy of Federal aid to public 
education in the States grew out of a clear perception by the founders of 
our Nation of the necessary relationship between education and democracy. 
The effective exercise of every sovereign power of our National Govern- 
ment is dependent upon intelligent, right-minded citizenship. An educated 
citizenry is the first great need of today, just as it was the first great need 
of the new Republic in 1789. 

Bill Prepared by National Education Association 

The Commission of the National Education Association prepared a meas- 
ure which was introduced in the Senate in October, 1918, by Senator Hoke 
Smith, of Georgia, and which was known as the Smith Bill. This orig- 
inal bill followed quite closely the provisions contained in the Smith-Lever 
and Smith-Hughes Acts. Certain of these provisions were justly criti- 
cised as permitting too much Federal interference. These objectionable 
features were eliminated and the bill carefully revised and reintroduced 
in the Senate at the opening of the special session of the Sixty-sixth Con- 
gress in May, 1918, by Senator Hoke Smith. It was introduced in the 
House by Representative Horace Mann Towner, of Iowa, and was known 
throughout the Sixty-sixth Congress as the Smith-Towner Bill. It was 
favorably reported by both the House and Senate Committees en Educa- 

[13] 



14 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



tion near the close of the Sixty-sixth Congress in February, 1921, but did 
not come to a vote in either House. The bill was again revised, and at 
the opening of the special session of the Sixty-seventh Congress in April, 
1921, was reintroduced in the House by Congressman Towner, and in the 
Senate by Senator Thomas Sterling, of South Dakota. The bill is known 
in the present, or Sixty-seventh Congress, as the Towner-Sterling Bill and 
is now pending in the Committees on Education of the Senate and House. 

Measure Attracts Nation-Wide Attention 

Probably no bill ever introduced in Congress has been so widely dis- 
tributed, so thoroughly considered, and so generally discussed. The pub- 
lic printer has stated that more copies of this bill have been called for than 
of any other bill before Congress. More than a hundred thousand copies 
of the bill have been printed and distributed. The repeated assertion of 
the opponents of the measure that it has not received thorough consider- 
ation is without foundation in fact. The National Educational Associa- 
tion and other organizations have printed and distributed thousands of 
copies of the bill, and pamphlets discussing its provisions, and the measure 
has been given consideration and discussion in educational publications and 
in the press in general. 

Quotation from Address by Judge Towner 

To determine accurately the intent and purpose of any proposed legis- 
lation it is well to have the interpretation which is put upon it by its authors 
and sponsors in Congress. The following is a quotation from an address 
delivered at the University of Illinois on December 2nd, 1921, by Con- 
gressman Horace Mann Towner, of Iowa, author of the bill in the House 
of Representatives : 

To claim that anyone, sponsor or supporter of the pending educational bill, de- 
sires or expects National control of education to follow the enactment of the legis- 
lation under consideration is without the slightest sanction. To state that the 
emphatic and repeated negations expressed in the strongest language that can be 
used which are incorporated in the very terms of the proposed law mean nothing 
and will not be, effective, is to say that no law can be made effective by its terms. 

But while Congress has no desire nor purpose nor constitutional power to take 
from the States the control of education, the General Government has the right to 
aid and encourage the States in the education of their and its citizens, and this 
right it has exercised repeatedly from the beginning of our history to the passage 
of the last Appropriation Act. It granted sections of the public lands to the States 
for schools. It granted townships of land for the creation and the support of uni- 
versities. Lands were given as long as they lasted, and then money was given. 
Congress gives annually over two and a half million dollars from the National 
Treasury for the "support and further endowment of colleges of agriculture and 
mechanic arts." Every year we give tens of millions of dollars from the National 
Treasury in support of almost every form of education. 

Why is it that these grants are not opposed? Why is it that where education is 
so much needed, at the very bottom of our political and social structure, where it 
enters into the very texture of the fabric of our American citizenship — in form 
about which there is no controversy and in substance the acknowledged essential — 
why is it that when it is proposed to strengthen our common school system the 
proposition is condemned and opposed? It must be that such opposition is based 



Brief History of the Bill 15 



upon a misconception of the proposed legislation. To think otherwise would be to 
believe that there are in our country those who really desire the destruction of 
our common school system. Such belief no loyal American would desire to en- 
tertain. 

Quotation from Address by Senator Sterling 

The following quotation is taken from an address delivered at the Uni- 
versity of Illinois on December 2nd, 1921, by Senator Thomas Sterling, of 
South Dakota, author of the bill in the Senate : 

It seems to me, viewed from the national standpoint, that the significance of 
Federal aid to education can no longer be open to conjecture. Further, that the 
aid thus far given in lands or in money has resulted in promotion of the general 
welfare, there can be little doubt. But there are present-day exigencies not within 
the scope of existing legislation, to aid in meeting which, is, in my judgment, the im- 
perative duty of the General Government. They cannot be met by a submerged 
and unrelated bureau in the Department of the Interior, empowered to gather and 
distribute statistical information. Nor can they be adequately met by Federal 
contributions only for specific objects to be matched, by equal contributions on the 
part of the States accepting them. The vital importance of the subject, its inti- 
mate relation to the well-being and safety of the people — and this is the highest 
law — as well as the dignity of the subject, all combine to urge as the next great 
step the creation of a Department of Education, with its Secretary a member of 
the President's cabinet, whose proper function it shall be, not alone to administer 
funds apportioned to the States, important though this may be, but through in- 
vestigation and research to cover the whole field of our educational resources and 
needs; and which, without dictation, without ignoring State plans or encroaching 
upon the freedom of State initiative, shall from its higher vantage ground en- 
courage, stimulate, and lead in every constitutional cooperative educational enter- 
prise that will enhance the general welfare. 



THE CREATION OF A DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Having considered the general principles, provisions and history of the 
Towner-Sterling Bill, let us now consider in greater detail from three 
standpoints the particular provisions of this proposed act relating to the 
creation of a Department of Education with a Secretary in the President's 
Cabinet. 

A. From the standpoint of the historic development of the executive de- 
partments of the Government that do not exercise powers of National 
sovereignty. 

B. From the standpoint of the effective administration of the Nation's 
present participation in education. 

C. From the standpoint of the need of recognized National leadership 
in public education. 

A. From the standpoint of the historic development of the 
executive departments of the Government that do not exercise 
powers of National sovereignty. 

Originally Three Executive Departments 

When our Federal Government was established, three executive depart- 
ments were created: The Department of State, the Department of The 
Treasury, and the Department of War. The heads of these departments, 
together with the Attorney-General, were the President's immediate ad- 
visers and came to be known as the President's Cabinet. In 1798 Congress 
established the Department of the Navy, and a fifth Cabinet officer was 
created. In 1829 the Postmaster General was elevated to Secretarial rank 
and made a member of the President's Cabinet. In 1849 the Department 
of the Interior was created, and to it were assigned certain more or less 
unrelated activities that had been in the other departments, including 
Indian Affairs and Pensions from the War Department, the Patent Office 
from the State Department, and the Land Office from the Treasury 
Department. These seven Cabinet members were each in charge of the 
administration of affairs over which the Federal Government had control 
under the provisions of the Constitution. It was thought then that there 
would be no further additions to the President's Cabinet. 

Department of Agriculture Established 

In 1862, in response to the urgent demands of the agricultural interests of 
the country, a Department of Agriculture was created, but not under a 
Secretary in the President's Cabinet. The opponents of the creation of a 
Department of Agriculture in Congress argued that inasmuch as the 
Federal Government had not been granted authority by the Constitution 
to control agriculture, it was illogical, if not unconstitutional, to create 
such a department. Those who favored the creation of this new depart- 

[17] 



18 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

ment conceded that the Federal Government could not control Agriculture, 
and that they did not wish such control ; but they claimed that it was within 
the province of the Federal Government to promote agriculture, and that 
because of the importance of the subject from a National standpoint, 
agriculture should receive such recognition. 

The Department grew very rapidly in influence and usefulness, and in 
1889 Congress passed a law placing its head in the President's Cabinet, 
with the title, Secretary of Agriculture. In the creation of the Department 
of Agriculture the precedent was established of having a Department with 
a Secretary in the President's Cabinet for the promotion of an interest of 
recognized National importance, over which the Federal Government was 
not given control under the provisions of the Constitution. 

Department of Commerce and Labor Created 

The business interests of the country soon thereafter started a movement 
for the creation of a Department of Commerce with a Secretary in the 
President's Cabinet to represent and promote the great commercial interests 
of the country. The labor interests requested that their welfare sheuld 
also be promoted, and they sought the creation of a Department of Labor 
with a Secretary in the President's Cabinet. In 1903 Congress responded 
to these demands by the creation of the Department of Commerce and 
Labor. Ten years later, in 1913, this Department was separated into the 
Department of Commerce and the Department of Labor, each under a 
Secretary in the President's Cabinet. 

The arguments made in Congress in support of the creation of these 
last two departments were the same as those made in support of the creation 
of the Department of Agriculture; namely, that they represent interests 
of such great National importance as to deserve this recognition, and that 
the purpose of the Department should be not to control, but to promote 
these interests. It is clear, then, that of the ten existing executive depart- 
ments the first seven administer affairs over which the Federal Government 
has control under the provisions of the Constitution, and that the last three 
exist not to control, but to promote the interests of Agriculture, Commerce, 
and Labor. The purpose of public education is the development of an 
intelligent citizenship. This is as important to the welfare and perpetuity 
of our American institutions as is the promotion of Agriculture, Commerce, 
or Labor. 

B. From the standpoint of the effective administration of the 
Nation's present participation in education. 

The Federal Government has promoted education from its very founda- 
tion. Through the years there has grown up a great number of educational 
activities which are administered or promoted under numerous unrelated 
boards, bureaus, and commissions. The extent to which the Federal 
Government is now engaged in educational work is shown by the following 
table : 



The Creation of a Department of Education 



19 



FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR EDUCATION 



Including only "education" or "training" in 
Schools, or their equivalent. Data furnished 
by the Educational Finance Inquiry 



IQ2I 

Amount 



Per cent of 

total without 

world war 

vocational 

rehabilitation 



Per cent of 
total with 
world war 
vocational 
rehabilitation 



General Education: 

U. S. Bureau of Education $162,045 

Payments to School Funds, Arizona 
and New Mexico, National Forest 

Fund 85,000 

Payment from Forest Fund for 

Schools, Roads 600,000 

Public schools Alaska fund 50,000 

Education natives of Alaska 331,318 

Indian Schools 4,629,712 

Howard University 243,000 

Total, without D. C 6,101,075 

District of Columbia 5,568,069 

Total, with D. C 11,669,144 

Per cent of increase over 1911, 

U. S. Bureau of Education 124.4 

Total, without D. C 41 . 5 

Total, with D. C 55.6 



Vocational Education for Civilians: 

Salaries and Expenses, Federal Board 

for Vocational Education 200,000 

Colleges for Ag. and M. A 2,500,000 

States Relations service 8,220,462 

Co-op. Vocational Education in Ag- 
riculture . 1,268,000 

Vocational Rehabilitation of Persons 

Disabled in Industry 871,000 

Co-op. Vocational Education in 

Trades and Industry 1,278,000 

Co-op. Vocational Education for 

Teachers 1,090,000 

Total $15,427,468 

Education for Defense or War Needs: 

West Point Military Academy $2,142,213 

War College, Gen. Staff 25,000 

U. S. Service Schools 100,000 

Instr. Field Art. Activities 6,000 

Coast Artillery School 28,000 

Engineer School 40,000 

Vocational Training for Soldiers.... 3,500,000 

Military Equip. Colleges 100 

Civilian Schools, 

Ordnance Reserves 61,800 

Civ. Military Training Camps 225,887 

Quartermaster Supplies R. O. T. C... 3,100,000 

Training Officers in Aeronautics 26,512 

State Marine Schools 75,000 

Naval Academy 3,915,408 

Summer School for Boys 200,000 



0.4 



0.1 



14.7 



28.0 



4.1 



7.8 



37.1 



10.3 



20 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR EDUCATION 

Including only ''education" or "training" in ■ total wtoout 'total with' 

Schools or their equivalent Data- furnished M»« world war world war 

by the Educational finance Inquiry amount vocational vocational 

rehabilitation rehabilitation 

Naval War College 90,950 

Naval Training Stations 975,000 

Total without Vocational Rehabil- 
itation, World War 14,511,870 34.9 9.7 

Vocational Rehabilitation, World 

War 108,000,000 

Total, with Vocational Rehabili- 
tation, World War 122,511,870 81.9 

Per cent of increase over 1911, 

Without Vocational Rehabilitation, 

World War ' 414.2 

With Vocational Rehabilitation, 

World War 4241 . 

Grand Total; 

Without Vocational Rehabilitation, 

World War $41,608,482 100.0 

With Vocational Rehabilitation, 

World War 149,608,482 .... 100.0 

Per cent of increase over 1911, 

Without Vocational Rehabilitation. . 209.8 
With " " .. 1013.9 

Co-ordination Would Promote Efficiency 

The foregoing educational work is scattered among several departments. 
The successive educational acts of Congress creating these educational 
activities were passed without a clear plan of coordination. Effective ad- 
ministration demands that all of these Federal activities, except such as are 
organically related to the work of some existing department, should be 
coordinated and unified under one executive head. This unification is pro- 
vided for in the Towner-Sterling Bill. Starting with the Bureau of Educa- 
tion, the educational activities of the Federal Government may be trans- 
ferred to the Department of Education as rapidly and as completely as 
Congress may determine wise and expedient. 

The recognized National importance of education demands that it should 
be given equal rank with the other general welfare activities of the Gov- 
ernment, not exercising National sovereignty — Agriculture, Commerce, and 
Labor — each of which exists as a constructive governmental agency for the 
promotion of a great National interest, and each of which is administered 
by a department under a Secretary in the President's Cabinet. 

C. From the standpoint of the need of recognized National 
leadership in public education. 

As previously stated in this brief, the conduct and management of public 
education, within the States, is exclusively a State function. This fact is 
established by the Federal Constitution. The advocates of the Towner- 
Sterling Bill have persistently and consistently opposed Federal control of 



The Creation of a Department of Education 21 

education. The Towner-Sterling Bill differs from other Acts granting 
Federal aid in that it guards and preserves State and local control more 
carefully than any other Act granting Federal aid which has been enacted 
or proposed. 

Nation Vitally Interested in Education 

However, the National consequences of education as carried on by the 
several States are as far reaching and inescapable in the United States as 
they are in those Nations which directly exercise sovereign power over 
education. Our Federal Government can never be indifferent to what is 
being done in education in the several States because the ill effects of 
mal-education and lack of education are as inescapable as the good effects of 
proper education. The guaranteed freedom of movement from one State 
to another (Constitution, Article 4, Section 2) makes us as interdependent 
educationally as we are economically. 

Purpose of Education to Develop Good Citizens 

The primary purpose of education from the standpoint of the State and 
the Nation is to develop good citizens. It must be conceded that a citizenry 
physically, intellectually, and morally sound is essential to the life and 
prosperity of our Republic, since a Government of the people can be no 
stronger than the composite citizenry of which it is composed. The privi- 
leges and responsibilities of American citizenship are not affected by State 
boundaries. Whatever tends to elevate and strengthen the quality of 
citizenship in any State promotes the welfare of the entire country, and 
any weakness or disorder in any State subtracts from the general health 
and security of the Nation. It becomes the imperative duty, of the Federal 
Government, therefore, to encourage and promote education in all the 
States to the end that every American child shall have an opportunity for 
the fullest physical and intellectual development of which he is capable, 
thereby conserving and developing the human resources of the Nation. 
Education is the Nation's best insurance and its only assurance. 

Department of Education Essential 

That the Federal Government may perform its proper function in the 
promotion of education in the States, there should be created a Department 
of Education at Washington, thereby giving to education such dignity and 
prominence as will attract public recognition, and it must be under such 
leadership as will command the respect and confidence of the educational 
forces of the country. This is absolutely essential. Anything less means 
failure. The leadership of the Federal Government in the promotion of 
public education cannot and should not be mandatory, but must be exercised 
through the persuasiveness of facts, principles, and procedures scientifically 
arrived at — a leadership that comes from conference and counsel. 



22 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



It is too much to expect the public to accept the educational leadership 
of an undersecretary or bureau chief who is not allowed to express an 
opinion on any public question without first obtaining permission from the 
head of the Department, and whose salary is far below what is regarded 
as a fair compensation for persons of recognized National leadership. The 
educational leader of the Nation, because of the paramount importance of 
education, must hold an outstanding position with powers and responsi- 
bilities clearly defined and subordinate to no one except the President. 

The Towner-Sterling Bill makes ample provision for such leadership. 
The Bill provides that "research shall be undertaken in (a) illiteracy; 
(b) immigrant education; (c) public education, and especially rural educa- 
tion; (d) physical education, including health education, recreation, and 
sanitation; (e) preparation and supply of competent teachers for the public 
schools; (/) higher education; and in such other fields as in the judgment 
of the Secretary of Education may require attention and study." (H. R. 7, 
67th Congress, Sec. 5.) 

National Council on Education Established 

The Towner-Sterling Bill also provides for a "National Council on 
Education to consult and advise with the Secretary of Education on 
subjects relating to the promotion and development of education in the 
United States. The Secretary of Education shall be chairman of said 
council, which shall be constituted as follows: (a) the chief educational 
authority in each State designated to represent said State in the administra- 
tion of this Act; (b) not to exceed twenty-five educators representing the 
different interests in education, to be appointed annually by the Secretary of 
Education; (c) not to exceed twenty-five persons, not educators, interested 
in the results of education from the standpoint of the public, to be appointed 
annually by the Secretary of Education." (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 
17.) 

This National Council will bring to the Secretary the views of the 
leaders in education in all the States, and at the same time enable the 
Secretary of Education to give to these State leaders suggestions for the 
promotion of education from the National standpoint, based upon the 
research and investigations of the Department. The recommendations of 
the Secretary can never be mandatory. His influence will depend upon 
the soundness of his recommendations and the strength and wisdom of his 
leadership. 

Secretary Given No Autocratic Power 

The assertions of the opponents of the Towner-Sterling Bill that the 
Secretary of Education will be an "autocrat" surrounded by "a horde of 
bureaucratic chiefs," and "bossing the teachers of the country" is 
absurd. Any fair-minded person who will read the provisions of the Bill 
will be convinced that such assertions are either misrepresentations or 



The Creation of a Department of Education 23 



erroneous deductions from false assumptions which are without foundation 
in fact. Let us again call attention to the provisions of the Bill "That all 
the educational facilities encouraged by the provisions of this Act and 
accepted by a State shall be organized, supervised, and administered exclu- 
sively by the legally constituted State and local educational authorities of 
said State, and the Secretary of Education shall exercise no authority in 
relation thereto: and this Act shall not be construed to imply Federal 
control of Education within the States, nor to impair the freedom of the 
States in the conduct and management of their respective school systems " 
(H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 13.) 



THE EXTENSION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF FEDERAL AID 
FOR THE PROMOTION OF EDUCATION 

Let us now consider somewhat in detail the extension of the principle of 
Federal aid for the five specific purposes set forth in the Towner-Sterling 
Bill: 

A. Removing illiteracy, 

B. Americanizing the foreign-born, 

C. Establishing effective programs of physical education, 

D. Providing well-qualified teachers for all public schools, and 

E. Equalizing educational opportunities within the States. 

Federal Aid Considered Historically 

Let us first consider the principle of Federal aid to education his- 
torically, and then turn to present conditions and needs, and to the remedies 
proposed by the Towner-Sterling Bill. 

It will be profitable to note the principles already established by educa- 
tional Acts of Congress. 

1. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage public 
schools by grants of land. 

The Land Act of 1785 set aside Lot No. 16 in every township of the 
Northwest Territory for the maintenance of public schools within said 
townships. In 1848 this bounty was increased to two sections in each 
township. Under the first of these provisions, 640 acres in each township 
were given to each of twelve States; under the second provision, 1,280 
acres in each township were given to each of sixteen States for public 
schools. 1 

2. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage public 
schools by appropriation of money. 

Oklahoma was given $5,000,000 when admitted as a State in lieu of 
certain sixteenth section lands, title to which was vested in the Indians. 2 

3. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage the 
establishment of colleges and universities by grants of land and money. 

This has been done repeatedly. The first form of grant was the tra- 
ditional "two townships" beginning with the grant to the Ohio Company. 
Later came salt lands, internal improvement lands, swamp lands, and 
finally, lands for the endowment of Colleges of Agriculture and Mechanic 
Arts. The Hatch Act, the second Morrill Act of 1890, the Nelson Act, 

1 The Nation and the Schools, Keith and Bagley, pp. 28 and 29. 
8 Ibid., Keith and Bagley, p. 31. 

[25] 



26 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

and the Adams Act have established the right to give money as well as 
lands for the maintenance and endowment of colleges. 1 

4. The Federal Government has established its right to enter into 
cooperative arrangements with the States for specific educational purposes. 

This is shown by the various Acts relating to the endowment of colleges, 
and also, in the Smith-Lever and the Smith-Hughes Acts, in which definite 
cooperative relationships were set up for the purpose of encouraging edu- 
cation. 2 

5. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage all 
kinds of educational and welfare work. 

In 1921, the Federal Government, as is shown in a table on another 
page of this report, spent $149,608,482 for educational purposes. We 
have in the Department of Agriculture, the States Relations Service, and 
in the Department of Labor, the Children's Bureau, and also promotional 
agencies in other departments. 

6. The Federal Government has established its right to promote the 
preparation of teachers. 

The Smith-Hughes Act appropriates money "for the purpose of cooper- 
ating with the States in preparing teachers, supervisors, and directors of 
(vocational) subjects." 

7. The Federal Government has established its right to collect and dis- 
seminate information. 

The Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor, and other 
Departments, send out a great mass of such information yearly. The Bu- 
reau of Education in the Department of the Interior has for years sent out 
bulletins containing educational information. 

Principle of Federal Aid Thoroughly Established 

The foregoing Acts of Congress have been in operation for years, are 
now in operation, and have been undisturbed by any adverse court decision. 
They constitute, therefore, precedent sanctioned by law, and prove that 
the principle of Federal aid for Nationally desirable ends is clearly and 
firmly established. 

This principle is approved by President Harding who, on October 1, 
1920, when a candidate for the Presidency, said: 

The Federal Government has established the precedent of promoting education. 
It has made liberal grants of land and money for the establishment and support of 
Colleges of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, and in more recent years has made 
appropriations for vocational education and household arts. Without interfering 
in any way with the control and management of public education by the States, 
the Federal Government should extend aid to the States for the promotion of 
physical education, the Americanization of the foreign-born, the eradication of 
illiteracy, the better training of teachers, and for promoting free educational oppor- 
tunities for all the children of all the people. 

1 Ibid., p. 102. 

2 Ibid., pp. 102 and 103. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 27 

So much for the historical aspects of the question and the precedents that 
have clearly shown the right of the Federal Government to carry on educa- 
tional functions both independently and in cooperation with the States. 

Federal Aid Needed to Remedy Existing Conditions 

Let us now consider existing conditions and needs that make it desirable 
for the Federal Government to encourage the States to carry on a more 
vigorous program in specific educational fields as provided in the Towner- 
Sterling Bill. 

It may be stated at the outset that there is no disagreement as to exist- 
ing educational conditions in the country. The seriousness of present con- 
ditions has been recognized and conceded by opponents of the Towner-Ster- 
ling Bill. Dr. Alexander J. Inglis, Professor of Education, Harvard Uni- 
versity, made the following statement in an address at the February, 1922, 
meeting of the Department of Superintendence of the National Education 
Association : 

In the first place let us recognize that in all parts of this country public educa- 
tion is very, very far from being that which we should all like to see it, that in 
parts of the country it is almost unbelievably bad, that vocational education has 
scarcely begun to be recognized, that the amount of illiteracy and of near-illiteracy 
is alarmingly great, that attention to physical education throughout the country is 
almost negligible, that our large foreign population constitutes a serious problem 
for education and for society, that most country children do not have anything like 
a fair opportunity for education, that in many sections of the country short school 
terms make effective education all but impossible, that a large part of our teachers 
lack proper education, training, and experience — let us recognize all these and 
many other defects of education too numerous to catalog. They are conditions 
which cry aloud for reform in the appealing voices of children deprived of their 
rights as American citizens. They are undoubted and indubitable facts which 
cannot be ignored. 

In order that these conditions may be known in something more than 
general terms let us now consider in detail, for each of the specific educa- 
tional fields with which the Towner-Sterling Bill concerns itself, the con- 
ditions as they now exist, and, at the same time, note how the Bill proposes 
that the Federal Government shall encourage the States to meet these con- 
ditions adequately. 

A. Eemoving Illiteracy 

Let us first examine the facts concerning the prevalence of illiteracy in 
the country. The accompanying table shows, according to the Federal 
census of 1920, that there were 4,931,905 illiterates ten years of age and 
over. 

Illiterates in the United States 

1900 6,180,069 

1910 5,516,163 

1920 4,931,905 

In twenty years the decrease has amounted to 1,248,164, or an average 
annual decrease of 62,408. If this rate of decrease continues, illiteracy 
will not disappear for eighty years. This is a discouraging prospect. 



28 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

If we disregard the negro and consider the white population alone, we 
get less comfort, as the accompanying table shows. 

White Illiterates in the United States 

1900 3,200,746 

1910 3,184,633 

1920 3,006,312 

There was a decrease of 194,434 in the number of white illiterates be- 
tween 1900 and 1920, or an average annual decrease of 9,721. At this 
rate it would require 310 years to remove illiteracy from our white popu- 
lation. If it had not been for the war, which prevented the entrance into 
the country of the usual thousands of immigrant illiterates, the situation 
would be even more discouraging. 

During this same twenty-year span, 1900 to 1920, the native white illiter- 
ates decreased from 1,913,611 to 1,242,572, or an average annual decrease 
of 33,552. At this rate, illiteracy among our native whites will not dis- 
appear until after a lapse of thirty-eight years. 

Native White Illiterates in United States 

1900 1,913,611 

1910 1,534,272 

1920 1,242,572 

The number of illiterates of voting age in our population in 1920 was 
4,333,111. This number is sixteen per cent of the total vote at the 1920 
Presidential election. If the rate of reduction in the number of illiterates 
over twenty-one years of age, which took place between 1910 and 1920, 
is maintained, illiteracy will not disappear from among those over twenty 
years of age until 180 years have passed. Now that the war is over, hun- 
dreds of thousands of aliens are once again entering our country each year. 1 
The illiteracy law will decidedly cut down the number of illiterates ad- 
mitted, but will not completely cut off the inflow of illiterates from this 
source, since certain exceptions in the law allow illiterates to be admitted 
to the country. In 1921, with the law in full effect, 27,463 illiterate 
immigrants were admitted. 

It is well known that illiteracy does not disappear according to such 
regular decreases as have been assumed for illustration. It disappears only 
as the older illiterates are taught and as those who are under the age of 
ten are so taught that they do not become classed as illiterates. The com- 
plete elimination of illiteracy among the native-born whites and negroes 
is primarily a problem of education during the years of childhood — not a 
problem of adult training. One section of the Towner-Sterling Bill pro- 
vides for teaching adult illiterates. Another section relates to the com- 
pulsory age of school children. 

1 1,200,000 entered in the two years, 1920 and 1921. (Annual Report. Com. Gen. of Immi- 
gration, 1921, p. 27.) 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 29 



Illiteracy Principally Among Native Born 

When it is realized that of the 4,931,905 illiterates in the United States 
in 1920, 3,084,733 were native-born and 1,847,172 foreign-born, the prob- 
lem is more clearly revealed as principally one of improving our schools. 
The problem of teaching adult native-born illiterates will, under the 
Towner-Sterling Bill, be a constantly diminishing one. 

Nor is the problem of illiteracy confined to any particular section of the 
country. The accompanying table shows that New York has more illiter- 
ates than any of the three Southern States with the greatest number of 
illiterates, and that Pennsylvania contains more illiterates than any of the 
Southern States, except Georgia. That the percentage of illiterates in 
New York State is smaller is beside the point. The fact remains that New 
York has the largest illiteracy problem in the United States. 

Number of Illiterates, 1920 
Northern States — ■ 

New York __ 425,022 

Pennsylvania 312,699 

Illinois 173,987 

Southern States — 

Georgia 328,838 

Alabama 278,082 

Mississippi 229,734 

Although illiteracy has been reduced in numbers and percentage in the 
country as a whole, in many of our more important States, it has increased 
during the decade 1910-1920, as the table below shows, in spite of the fact 
that the inflow of illiterates from abroad was largely cut off due to the war. 
In every one of these States there was an actual increase in the number of 
illiterates and, for the twelve States, there was a total increase of 117,344. 

t.. . . , „ No. of No. of 

Division and State. illiterates illiterates 

1920. 1910. 

Massachusetts 146,607 141 541 

Connecticut 67,265 53,'665 

New York 425,022 406,020 

New Jersey 127,661 113,502 

° hl ° 131,006 124,774 

JHjnois , 173,987 168,294 

Michigan 88,046 74,800 

Je x as 295,844 282,904 

Colorado 24,208 23,780 

„ r nz ? na 39,131 32,953 

Washington 18)S2 6 18,416 

California 95,592 74,902 

It should also be remembered that the right of free movement between 
the States, guaranteed by the Constitution, makes the illiteracy problem of 
any State, the potential problem of every State. The 1910 census shows 
that twenty-two per cent of our native-born population was living in 



30 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

States other than those of their birth. Transportation is becoming easier 
in the United States with each succeeding year and we can look forward 
to a continual increase in inter-State migration. Illiteracy, therefore, can- 
not be looked upon as being confined to or as the special problem of any State 
or group of States. It must be looked upon as a matter of National con- 
cern and only a general effort among the States to meet it will be success- 
ful. In this fact is found the justification for the encouragement of the 
States through Federal aid, as provided in the Towner-Sterling Bill. 

Federal Census Understates Illiteracy Problems 

All the figures thus far quoted in regard to the prevalence of illiteracy in 
the country are based upon the Federal census. There is evidence to justify 
the belief that the Federal census greatly underestimates the importance of 
this problem, due to the definition of illiteracy as made by those in charge 
of taking the census. In interpreting Federal census figures it should be 
kept in mind that they are for what might be termed absolute illiterates. 
The following statements more clearly define this term. 

1. No test to determine illiteracy is made by the census enumerator, but the state- 
ment of each person enumerated, or a statement made on his behalf by some mem- 
ber of his family or another person, is accepted by the enumerator. 1 

2. A statement by a foreigner that he is able to read and write in a foreign 
language is sufficient to cause him to be returned by the enumerator as a literate. 1 

3. The Census Bureau classifies as illiterate any person ten years of age or over 
who is unable to write in any language, . . . regardless of ability to read. 2 

4. In general the illiterate population as shown by the Census reports should be 
understood as representing only those persons ivho have had no schooling what- 
ever. 2 

5. . . . the "literate" population in this report should be understood as in- 
cluding all persons who have had even the slightest amount of schooling. 3 

An illiterate according to the Federal census, therefore, is one who con- 
fesses to a total lack of schooling, or rather to a total lack of ability to 
write. On the other hand literates are defined as "persons who have had 
even the slightest amount of schooling." When this definition of illiteracy 
is fully comprehended, the statement that there were five million illiterates 
in 1920 has a new significance. There are doubtless many illiterates who, 
due to the fear of the stigma of illiteracy, falsify their statements to the 
enumerator. In Volume 1 of the 1910 census we find the following state- 
ment on this point: "There is undoubtedly a certain margin of error in the 
statistics of illiteracy. ... In some cases there may be unwillingness 
to admit illiteracy. 

That the Federal census was an understatement of the real problem of 
illiteracy was known before the war. It was not until statistics on illiter- 
acy resulting from the draft became available, however, that it was realized 
how far the Federal census really hides the problem of illiteracy. The 
draft figures indicate that in addition to the five million absolute illiterates, 



1 Quoted from communication from Mr. W. M. Steuart, Director of Census, dated April 
13, 1922, directed to the National Education Association. 

2 Advance sheets from the Volume on Population, 1920 census, page 4. 

3 Volume No. 1, 1910 census, p. 1185. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 31 

there are many other millions who for all practical purposes are illiterates 
in that they fail to possess the ability to discharge those civic duties that 
involve the ability to read and write with a reasonable degree of facility. 
The Director of the Census clearly recognizes this fact. An inquiry on 
April 11, 1922, was addressed to Mr. W. M. Steuart, Director of the 
Census, from the National Education Association in which the following 
question was asked: "If literacy were to be defined as follows: 'The ability 
to read a simple newspaper article in some language with reasonable speed 
and comprehension and the ability to write a very simple friendly letter 
with reasonable speed and accuracy,' is it your belief that the figures given 
in the 1920 census are an understatement or overstatement of the number 
of illiterates in the United States?" Mr. Steuart, in reply dated April 13, 
1922, over his signature, gave the following: "If illiteracy were defined as 
suggested by you . . . the census figures would undoubtedly under- 
state the number of illiterates in the United States.". (Italics ours.) 

Revelations of Selective Draft Startling 

But let us consider the facts concerning illiteracy as brought out by the 
draft examinations. In connection with the psychological tests, all men 
were segregated into two groups, literates and illiterates. A total of 
1,552,256 men were examined during the draft. The men examined were 
distributed among twenty-eight camps, located in every section of the 
country. The figures below give the summarized results. 

Number of men examined 1,552,256 

Per cent illiterate 24.9 

The figures of the Federal census show that in 1920 six per cent of the 
population over ten years of age were illiterate. The draft figures show that 
24.9 per cent of all the men examined were illiterate. The principal cause 
of the difference between these two figures is probably the difference between 
the definitions of illiteracy of the census and of the draft. The meaning of 
illiteracy, according to the census, has been explained above. The mean- 
ing of illiteracy according to the draft may be inferred from the following, 
keeping in mind that literate men were supposed to take the Alpha examina- 
tion and illiterate men, the Beta examination. 

1. "In general it may be said that many of the camps aimed at an 'ability 
to read and understand newspapers and write letters home' as a basis for 
the Alpha examination, and that the figures for the number of men taking 
Beta do approximately reflect this level of literacy." 1 

2. The men in charge of segregating the recruits for the two examina- 
tions were practically all college trained and had had special training for 
army examining. 

3. In segregating the recruits into two groups, literates and illiterates, 
the examiners had in mind that the recruit had to be able to read sufficiently 

1 Psychological Examining in the U. S. Army, official report of the Division of Psychology, 
under Surgeon General U. S. Army, p. 743. 



32 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



well so that he could do himself justice in a test involving the following 
type of reading matter: 

Test 2— (Alpha Army Test) 

Get the answers to these examples as quickly as you can. Use the side of this 
page to figure on if you need to. 

Samples 1. How many are 5 men and 10 men? Answer (15) 

2. If you walk 4 miles an hour for 3 hours, how far do you 

walk? Answer (12) 

1. How many are 30 men and 7 men? Answer ( ) 

2. If you save $7 a month for 4 months, how much will you 

save ? Answer ( ) 

and so on for 20 increasingly difficult problems. 
4. Recruits not able to read and write in English were classed as illiter- 
ates and given the Beta examination. 

Draft Figures Verified by Camp Investigations 

The official report of Psychological Examining in the army contains, 
besides the total figures on illiteracy, representing combined figures from 
various camps, a number of studies of illiteracy made in individual camps. 
The results of one of these studies made in Camp Wadsworth is quoted as 
typical. This study, as well as those made in the other camps, was made 
under the direction of commissioned officers, all of whom were trained 
psychologists. 

The percentage of illiteracy for various localities represented in recent draft 
examinations is as follows: 



Locality 


Date of draft 


Number 
examined 


Number 
illiterate 


Per cent 
illiterate 


New York State 


May 25, 1918 
July 5, 1918 
July 24, 1918 


8,965 

981 

4,692 


1,484 
487 
670 


16.6 
49.5 




14.2 



The above figures are most significant in the light of the fact that the drafted 
men from New York State include many foreigners. In spite of that fact the 
percentage of illiteracy (16.6) seems to be very small when compared with the 
percentage of illiteracy found among the men reporting from South Carolina. In 
fact, the percentage for the latter group was found to be so high as to make us 
doubt the accuracy of the data. A check was therefore made as follows: The 
records of all South Carolina men in one company were analyzed, with the result 
that of the 177 men in the company, 109, or 61.6 per cent, were illiterate. It seems 
from this check that the percentage of illiteracy (49.5 per cent) for the whole 
group from South Carolina is probably correct. 

Such a percentage of illiteracy as is found among the men from South Carolina 
is startling. Among Virginia negroes reporting at Camp Lee, Va., in the fall of 
1917 the percentage of illiteracy was 40 per cent. The conclusion is that the 
problem of illiteracy among South Carolina drafted men is a most serious one. 1 

The unexpectedly high percentage of illiteracy found in various camps 
was similarly questioned in other camps in all sections of the country with 
the general result that searching studies revealed them to be substantially 

1 Quoted from Psychological Examining in the U. S. Army, official report of the Division of 
Psychology, under Surgeon General U. S. Army, p. 746. 



THE EXTENSION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF FEDERAL AID 
FOR THE PROMOTION OF EDUCATION 

Let us now consider somewhat in detail the extension of the principle of 
Federal aid for the five specific purposes set forth in the Towner-Sterline 
Bill: 

A. Removing illiteracy, 

B. Americanizing the foreign-born, 

C. Establishing effective programs of physical education, 

D. Providing well-qualified teachers for all public schools, and 

E. Equalizing educational opportunities within the States. 

Federal Aid Considered Historically 

Let us first consider the principle of Federal aid to education his- 
torically, and then turn to present conditions and needs, and to the remedies 
proposed by the Towner-Sterling Bill. 

It will be profitable to note the principles already established by educa- 
tional Acts of Congress. 

1. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage public 
schools by grants of land. 

The Land Act of 1785 set aside Lot No. 16 in every township of the 
Northwest Territory for the maintenance of public schools within said 
townships. In 1848 this bounty was increased to two sections in each 
township. Under the first of these provisions, 640 acres in each township 
were given to each of twelve States; under the second provision, 1,280 
acres in each township were given to each of sixteen States for public 
schools. 1 

2. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage public 
schools by appropriation of money. 

Oklahoma was given $5,000,000 when admitted as a State in lieu of 
certain sixteenth section lands, title to which was vested in the Indians. 2 

3. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage the 
establishment of colleges and universities by grants of land and money. 

This has been done repeatedly. The first form of grant was the tra- 
ditional "two townships" beginning with the grant to the Ohio Company. 
Later came salt lands, internal improvement lands, swamp lands, and 
finally, lands for the endowment of Colleges of Agriculture and Mechanic 
Arts. The Hatch Act, the second Morrill Act of 1890, the Nelson Act, 

1 The Nation and the Schools, Keith and Bagley, pp. 28 and 29. 
* Ibid., Keith and Bagley, p. 31. 

[25] 



26 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

and the Adams Act have established the right to give money as well as 
lands for the maintenance and endowment of colleges. 1 

4. The Federal Government has established its right to enter into 
cooperative arrangements with the States for specific educational purposes. 

This is shown by the various Acts relating to the endowment of colleges, 
and also, in the Smith-Lever and the Smith-Hughes Acts, in which definite 
cooperative relationships were set up for the purpose of encouraging edu- 
cation. 2 

5. The Federal Government has established its right to encourage all 
kinds of educational and welfare work. 

In 1921, the Federal Government, as is shown in a table on another 
page of this report, spent $149,608,482 for educational purposes. We 
have in the Department of Agriculture, the States Relations Service, and 
in the Department of Labor, the Children's Bureau, and also promotional 
agencies in other departments. 

6. The Federal Government has established its right to promote the 
preparation of teachers. 

The Smith-Hughes Act appropriates money "for the purpose of cooper- 
ating with the States in preparing teachers, supervisors, and directors of 
. . . (vocational) subjects." 

7. The Federal Government has established its right to collect and dis- 
seminate information. 

The Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor, and other 
Departments, send out a great mass of such information yearly. The Bu- 
reau of Education in the Department of the Interior has for years sent out 
bulletins containing educational information. 

Principle of Federal Aid Thoroughly Established 

The foregoing Acts of Congress have been in operation for years, are 
now in operation, and have been undisturbed by any adverse court decision. 
They constitute, therefore, precedent sanctioned by law, and prove that 
the principle of Federal aid for Nationally desirable ends is clearly and 
firmly established. 

This principle is approved by President Harding who, on October 1, 
1920, when a candidate for the Presidency, said: 

The Federal Government has established the precedent of promoting education. 
It has made liberal grants of land and money for the establishment and support of 
Colleges of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, and in more recent years has made 
appropriations for vocational education and household arts. Without interfering 
in any way with the control and management of public education by the States, 
the Federal Government should extend aid to the States for the promotion of 
physical education, the Americanization of the foreign-born, the eradication of 
illiteracy, the better training of teachers, and for promoting free educational oppor- 
tunities for all the children of all the people. 

1 Ibid., p. io2. 

2 Ibid., pp. 102 and 103. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 27 

So much for the historical aspects of the question and the precedents that 
have clearly shown the right of the Federal Government to carry on educa- 
tional functions both independently and in cooperation with the States. 

Federal Aid Needed to Remedy Existing Conditions 

Let us now consider existing conditions and needs that make it desirable 
for the Federal Government to encourage the States to carry on a more 
vigorous program in specific educational fields as provided in the Towner- 
Sterling Bill. 

It may be stated at the outset that there is no disagreement as to exist- 
ing educational conditions in the country. The seriousness of present con- 
ditions has been recognized and conceded by opponents of the Towner-Ster- 
ling Bill. Dr. Alexander J. Inglis, Professor of Education, Harvard Uni- 
versity, made the following statement in an address at the February, 1922, 
meeting of the Department of Superintendence of the National Education 
Association : 

In the first place let us recognize that in all parts of this country public educa- 
tion is very, very far from being that which we should all like to see it, that in 
parts of the country it is almost unbelievably bad, that vocational education has 
scarcely begun to be recognized, that the amount of illiteracy and of near-illiteracy 
is alarmingly great, that attention to physical education throughout the country is 
almost negligible, that our large foreign population constitutes a serious problem 
for education and for society, that most country children do not have anything like 
a fair opportunity for education, that in many sections of the country short school 
terms make effective education all but impossible, that a large part of our teachers 
lack proper education, training, and experience — let us recognize all these and 
many other defects of education too numerous to catalog. They are conditions 
which cry aloud for reform in the appealing voices of children deprived of their 
rights as American citizens. They are undoubted and indubitable facts which 
cannot be ignored. 

In order that these conditions may be known in something more than 
general terms let us now consider in detail, for each of the specific educa- 
tional fields with which the Towner-Sterling Bill concerns itself, the con- 
ditions as they now exist, and, at the same time, note how the Bill proposes 
that the Federal Government shall encourage the States to meet these con- 
ditions adequately. 

A. Removing Illiteracy 

Let us first examine the facts concerning the prevalence of illiteracy in 
the country. The accompanying table shows, according to the Federal 
census of 1920, that there were 4,931,905 illiterates ten years of age and 
over. 

Illiterates in the United States 

1900 6,180,069 

1910 5,516,163 

1920 4,931,905 

In twenty years the decrease has amounted to 1,248,164, or an average 
annual decrease of 62,408. If this rate of decrease continues, illiteracy 
will not disappear for eighty years. This is a discouraging prospect. 



28 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

If we disregard the negro and consider the white population alone, we 
get less comfort, as the accompanying table shows. 

White Illiterates in the United States 

1900 3,200,746 

1910 3,184,633 

1920 3,006,312 

There was a decrease of 194,434 in the number of white illiterates be- 
tween 1900 and 1920, or an average annual decrease of 9,721. At this 
rate it would require 310 years to remove illiteracy from our white popu- 
lation. If it had not been for the war, which prevented the entrance into 
the country of the usual thousands of immigrant illiterates, the situation 
would be even more discouraging. 

During this same twenty-year span, 1900 to 1920, the native white illiter- 
ates decreased from 1,913,611 to 1,242,572, or an average annual decrease 
of 33,552. At this rate, illiteracy among our native whites will not dis- 
appear until after a lapse of thirty-eight years. 

Native White Illiterates in United States 

1900 1,913,611 

1910 _. 1,534,272 

1920 1,242,572 

The number of illiterates of voting age in our population in 1920 was 
4,333,111. This number is sixteen per cent of the total vote at the 1920 
Presidential election. If the rate of reduction in the number of illiterates 
over twenty-one years of age, which took place between 1910 and 1920, 
is maintained, illiteracy will not disappear from among those over twenty 
years of age until 180 years have passed. Now that the war is over, hun- 
dreds of thousands of aliens are once again entering our country each year. 1 
The illiteracy law will decidedly cut down the number of illiterates ad- 
mitted, but will not completely cut off the inflow of illiterates from this 
source, since certain exceptions in the law allow illiterates to be admitted 
to the country. In 1921, with the law in full effect, 27,463 illiterate 
immigrants were admitted. 

It is well known that illiteracy does not disappear according to such 
regular decreases as have been assumed for illustration. It disappears only 
as the older illiterates are taught and as those who are under the age of 
ten are so taught that they do not become classed as illiterates. The com- 
plete elimination of illiteracy among the native-born whites and negroes 
is primarily a problem of education during the years of childhood — not a 
problem of adult training. One section of the Towner-Sterling Bill pro- 
vides for teaching adult illiterates. Another section relates to the com- 
pulsory age of school children. 

1 t, 2oo, ooo entered in the two years, 1920 and 1921. (Annual Report. Com. Gen. of Immi- 
gration, 1921, p. 27.) 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 29 



Illiteracy Principally Among Native Born 

When it is realized that of the 4,931,905 illiterates in the United States 
in 1920, 3,084,733 were native-born and 1,847,172 foreign-born, the prob- 
lem is more clearly revealed as principally one of improving our schools. 
The problem of teaching adult native-born illiterates will, under the 
Towner-Sterling Bill, be a constantly diminishing one. 

Nor is the problem of illiteracy confined to any particular section of the 
country. The accompanying table shows that New York has more illiter- 
ates than any of the three Southern States with the greatest number of 
illiterates, and that Pennsylvania contains more illiterates than any of the 
Southern States, except Georgia. That the percentage of illiterates in 
New York State is smaller is beside the point. The fact remains that New 
York has the largest illiteracy problem in the United States. 

Number of Illiterates, 1920 
Northern States — 

New York 425,022 

Pennsylvania 312,699 

Illinois 173,987 

Southern States — 

Georgia 328,838 

Alabama 278,082 

Mississippi 229,734 

Although illiteracy has been reduced in numbers and percentage in the 
country as a whole, in many of our more important States, it has increased 
during the decade 1910-1920, as the table below shows, in spite of the fact 
that the inflow of illiterates from abroad was largely cut off due to the war. 
In every one of these States there was an actual increase in the number of 
illiterates and, for the twelve States, there was a total increase of 117,344. 

No. of No. of 

Division and State. illiterates illiterates 

1920. 1910. 

Massachusetts 146,607 141,541 

Connecticut 67,265 53,665 

New York 425,022 406,020 

New Jersey 127,661 113,502 

Ohio 131,006 124,774 

Illinois 173,987 168,294 

Michigan 88,046 74,800 

Texas 295,844 282,904 

Colorado 24,208 23,780 

Arizona , 39,131 32,953 

Washington 18,526 18,416 

California 95,592 74,902 

It should also be remembered that the right of free movement between 
the States, guaranteed by the Constitution, makes the illiteracy problem of 
any State, the potential problem of every State. The 1910 census shows 
that twenty-two per cent of our native-born population was living in 



30 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

States other than those of their birth. Transportation is becoming easier 
in the United States with each succeeding year and we can look forward 
to a continual increase in inter-State migration. Illiteracy, therefore, can- 
not be looked upon as being confined to or as the special problem of any State 
or group of States. It must be looked upon as a matter of National con- 
cern and only a general effort among the States to meet it will be success- 
ful. In this fact is found the justification for the encouragement of the 
States through Federal aid, as provided in the Towner-Sterling Bill. 

Federal Census Understates Illiteracy Problems 

All the figures thus far quoted in regard to the prevalence of illiteracy in 
the country are based upon the Federal census. There is evidence to justify 
the belief that the Federal census greatly underestimates the importance of 
this problem, due to the definition of illiteracy as made by those in charge 
of taking the census. In interpreting Federal census figures it should be 
kept in mind that they are for what might be termed absolute illiterates. 
The following statements more clearly define this term. 

1. No test to determine illiteracy is made by the census enumerator, but the state- 
ment of each person enumerated, or a statement made on his behalf by some mem- 
ber of his family or another person, is accepted by the enumerator. 1 

2. A statement by a foreigner that he is able to read and write in a foreign 
language is sufficient to cause him to be returned by the enumerator as a literate. 1 

3. The Census Bureau classifies as illiterate any person ten years of age or over 
who is unable to write in any language, . . . regardless of ability to read. 2 

4. In general the illiterate population as shown by the Census reports should be 
understood as representing only those persons ivho have had no schooling what- 
ever. 2 

5. . . . the "literate" population in this report should be understood as in- 
cluding all persons who have had even the slightest amount of schooling. 3 

An illiterate according to the Federal census, therefore, is one who con- 
fesses to a total lack of schooling, or rather to a total lack of ability to 
write. On the other hand literates are defined as "persons who have had 
even the slightest amount of schooling." When this definition of illiteracy 
is fully comprehended, the statement that there were five million illiterates 
in 1920 has a new significance. There are doubtless many illiterates who, 
due to the fear of the stigma of illiteracy, falsify their statements to the 
enumerator. In Volume 1 of the 1910 census we find the following state- 
ment on this point: "There is undoubtedly a certain margin of error in the 
statistics of illiteracy. ... In some cases there may be unwillingness 
to admit illiteracy. . . ." 

That the Federal census was an understatement of the real problem of 
illiteracy was known before the war. It was not until statistics on illiter- 
acy resulting from the draft became available, however, that it was realized 
how far the Federal census really hides the problem of illiteracy. The 
draft figures indicate that in addition to the five million absolute illiterates, 



1 Quoted from communication from Mr. W. M. Steuart, Director of Census, dated April 
13, 1922, directed to the National Education Association. 

2 Advance sheets from the Volume on Population, 1920 census, page 4. 

3 Volume No. 1, 1910 census, p. 1183. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 31 

there are many other millions who for all practical purposes are illiterates 
in that they fail to possess the ability to discharge those civic duties that 
involve the ability to read and write with a reasonable degree of facility. 
The Director of the Census clearly recognizes this fact. An inquiry on 
April 11, 1922, was addressed to Mr. W. M. Steuart, Director of the 
Census, from the National Education Association in which the following 
question was asked: "If literacy were to be defined as follows: 'The ability 
to read a simple newspaper article in some language with reasonable speed 
and comprehension and the ability to write a very simple friendly letter 
with reasonable speed and accuracy,' is it your belief that the figures given 
in the 1920 census are an understatement or overstatement of the number 
of illiterates in the United States?" Mr. Steuart, in reply dated April 13, 
1922, over his signature, gave the following: "If illiteracy were defined as 
suggested by you . . . the census figures would undoubtedly under- 
state the number of illiterates in the United States." (Italics ours.) 

Revelations of Selective Draft Startling • 

But let us consider the facts concerning illiteracy as brought out by the 
draft examinations. In connection with the psychological tests, all men 
were segregated into two groups, literates and illiterates. A total of 
1,552,256 men were examined during the draft. The men examined were 
distributed among twenty-eight camps, located in every section of the 
country. The figures below give the summarized results. 

Number of men examined 1,552,256 

Per cent illiterate 24.9 

The figures of the Federal census show that in 1920 six per cent of the 
population over ten years of age were illiterate. The draft figures show that 
24.9 per cent of all the men examined were illiterate. The principal cause 
of the difference between these two figures is probably the difference between 
the definitions of illiteracy of the census and of the draft. The meaning of 
illiteracy, according to the census, has been explained above. The mean- 
ing of illiteracy according to the draft may be inferred from the following, 
keeping in mind that literate men were supposed to take the Alpha examina- 
tion and illiterate men, the Beta examination. 

1. "In general it may be said that many of the camps aimed at an 'ability 
to read and understand newspapers and write letters home' as a basis for 
the Alpha examination, and that the figures for the number of men taking 
Beta do approximately reflect this level of literacy." 1 

2. The men in charge of segregating the recruits for the two examina- 
tions were practically all college trained and had had special training for 
army examining. 

3. In segregating the recruits into two groups, literates and illiterates, 
the examiners had in mind that the recruit had to be able to read sufficiently 



1 Psychological Examining in the U. S. Army, official report of the Division of Psychology, 
under Surgeon General U. S. Army, p. 743. 



32 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



well so that he could do himself justice in a test involving the following 

type of reading matter: 

Test 2— (Alpha Army Test) 

Get the answers to these examples as quickly as you can. Use the side of this 
page to figure on if you need to. 

Samples 1. How many are 5 men and 10 men? Answer (15) 

2. If you walk 4 miles an hour for 3 hours, how far do you 

walk? Answer (12) 

1. How many are 30 men and 7 men ? Answer ( ) 

2. If you save $7 a month for 4 months, how much will you 

save ? • Answer ( ) 

and so on for 20 increasingly difficult problems. 
4. Recruits not able to read and write in English were classed as illiter- 
ates and given the Beta examination. 

Draft Figures Verified by Camp Investigations 

The official report of Psychological Examining in the army contains, 
besides the total figures on illiteracy, representing combined figures frorri 
various camps, a number of studies of illiteracy made in individual camps. 
The results of one of these studies made in Camp Wadsworth is quoted as 
typical. This study, as well as those made in the other camps, was made 
under the direction of commissioned officers, all of whom were trained 
psychologists. 

The percentage of illiteracy for various localities represented in recent draft 
examinations is as follows: 



Locality- 


Date of draft 


Number 
examined 


Number . 
illiterate 


Per cent 
illiterate 




May 25, 1918 
July 5, 1918 
July 24, 1918 


8,965 

981 

4,692 


1,484 
487 

670 


16.6 
49.5 




14.2 







The above figures are most significant in the light of the fact that the drafted 
men from New York State include many foreigners. In spite of that fact the 
percentage of illiteracy (16.6) seems to be very small when compared with the 
percentage of illiteracy found among the men reporting from South Carolina. In 
fact, the percentage for the latter group was found to be so high as to make us 
doubt the accuracy of the data. A check was therefore made as follows: The 
records of all South Carolina men in one company were analyzed, with the result 
that of the 177 men in the company, 109, or 61.6 per cent, were illiterate. It seems 
from this check that the percentage of illiteracy (49.5 per cent) for the whole 
group from South Carolina is probably correct. 

Such a percentage of illiteracy as is found among the men from South Carolina 
is startling. Among Virginia negroes reporting at Camp Lee, Va., in the fall of 
1917 the percentage of illiteracy was 40 per cent. The conclusion is that the 
problem of illiteracy among South Carolina drafted men is a most serious one. 1 

The unexpectedly high percentage of illiteracy found in various camps 
was similarly questioned in other camps in all sections of the country with 
the general result that searching studies revealed them to be substantially 

1 Quoted from Psychological Examining in the U. S. Army, official report of the Division of 
Psychology, under Surgeon General U. S. Army, p. 740. 



ExfENSiON of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 33 

correct. The official report on the army tests summarized the whole 
situation regarding illiteracy by stating that "the extent of illiteracy among 
drafted men is a striking fact" and indicates "conditions of serious public 
concern." * 

Illiteracy Impairs Effective Citizenship 

The great difference between the figures for illiteracy given by the 
Federal census and the Army draft report is due principally to the difference 
in the definition of illiteracy as used in the two reports. It is not necessary 
to accept either one absolutely. The question of fundamental importance 
to the welfare of our Nation is this: In a democracy in which universal 
suffrage is in force, can we longer safely disregard the facts that 6 per cent, 
or five million of our population, can be classed as absolute and confessed 
illiterates, and that 24.9 per cent of our young men are so limited in their 
literacy that they are unable "to read and understand newspapers and 
write letters home"? Fine distinctions as to the definitions of illiteracy 
and the exact percentage of illiteracy in our population are beside the point. 
The fact clearly exists that an alarming number of our citizens are so 
limited in their ability to read and write that they are obviously unable 
intelligently to discharge their civic duties. The condition would be less 
startling if it had not already been shown that any great reduction in the 
amount of illiteracy in the country is unlikely in the immediate future 
unless the Federal Government encourages the States to undertake its 
removal. 

Less Illiteracy in Other Countries 

The position of the United States in its tolerance of illiteracy is unique 
among the enlightened countries of the world. The following table gives 
the latest facts available for illiteracy in the principal enlightened nations 
of the world. 

Illiteracy in the United States and Foreign Countries 2 

Country Percentage illiteracy 

Germany -1% 

Switzerland -5% 

Netherlands -6% 

Finland .9% 

Norway 1.0% 

Sweden 1.0% 

Scotland 3.5% 3 

France 4.9% 

England 5.8% 3 

UNITED STATES 6.0% 

- These data are from two sources: (a) Cubberley — History of Education, p. 714; (b) Com- 
munications from foreign legations received by National Education Association during April, 

3 The British Library of Information of New York states in 1922 "as far as England and 
Scotland are concerned, illiteracy is practically unknown except among a few quite old 
people who did not enjoy the benefits of compulsory education which has been in existence 
for years." 



34 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

So much for the present conditions with regard to illiteracy in the United 
States. That these conditions constitute a problem of serious National 
concern, few would deny. Under present conditions, however, there is 
little chance of any great improvement for the better in the immediate 
future. The whole array of facts calls for a clearer recognition of the 
problem by the States and a more aggressive attempt on their part to 
remedy it. 

States Encouraged to Remove Illiteracy 

The Towner-Sterling Bill goes at the heart of the question directly in 
the following language : 

In order to encourage the States to remove illiteracy, $7,500,000, or so much 
thereof as may be necessary, is authorized to be appropriated annually for the 
instruction of native illiterates fourteen years of age and over. (H. R. 7, 67th 
Congress, Sec. 7.) 

In order that this money may reach States where it is most needed, the 
following provision is contained in the Bill : 

Said sum shall be apportioned to the States — in the proportions which their 
respective illiterate population fourteen years of age and over, not including foreign 
born illiterates, bear to such total illiterate population of the United States. {Ibid., 
Sec. 7.) 

At the same time the initiative of the States is completely protected in 
the following provision: 

All funds apportioned to a State for the removal of illiteracy shall be distributed 
and administered in accordance with the laws of said State in like manner as the 
funds provided by State and local authorities for the same purpose, and the State 
and local authorities of said State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and 
methods for carrying out the purposes of this section. (Ibid., Sec. 7.) 

Thus, it is seen that the Bill provides a definite step in the direction of 
removing illiteracy, but that it at the same time limits the authority of the 
Federal Government to that which may be exercised through the persuasive 
influence of facts and suggestions emanating from a source of recognized 
leadership. 

B. Americanizing the Foreign-born 

Let us examine the facts concerning the number of foreign-born residents 
in the United States. According to the 1920 census, as the accompanying 
table shows, there were 13,920,692 foreign-born residents in the United 
States. 

Nu7/iber of Foreign-born Residents in the United States 

1870 5,567,229 

1880 6,679,943 

1890 9,249,960 

1900 10,341,276 

1910 13,515,886 

1920 13,920,692 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 35 



Foreign-born Population Increasing 

The number of foreign-born has been steadily increasing with each 
succeeding decade; between 1910 and 1920 there was an increase amounting 
to 404,806. This was in spite of the fact that the war very decidedly cut 
down the number of alien immigrants admitted to the country during this 
decade, as the table below shows. 

Number of Alien Immigrants Admitted Yearly 

1913 1,197,892 

1914_____: 1,218,480 

1915 326,700 

1916 298,826 

1917 295,403 

1918 110,618 

1919 141,132 ■ 

1920 430,001 

1921 - 805,228 

1922 355.825 1 

Equally important with the increase in numbers is the change in the 
character of the immigrants who have been entering our country. About 
1880 the character of immigrants changed in a very remarkable manner. 
Immigration from the North and West of Europe began declining abruptly 
and was replaced by an inflow of alien peoples from the South and East 
of Europe. This flow of people from Southern Europe soon developed 
into a great stream. 

Practically no Italians came to us before 1870, whereas in the five-year 
period beginning 1906, 1,186,000 arrived from that country alone. 2 In the 
decade between 1900 and 1910 there was a loss of 275,911 in the number 
of people coming from Northwestern Europe, and an increase of 3,215,689 
from Southern and Eastern Europe. 

New Type of Immigrant Magnifies Problem 

This enormous influx from countries in which little education exists 
and in which social and political ideals are so radically different from our 
own, gives a new significance to the ever-increasing number of aliens in 
our midst. The seriousness of the double problem created both by the 
increase in numbers and the change in character of our immigrants has been 
recognized by Congress, which in May, 1921, passed "An Act to limit 
immigration of aliens into the United States." This Act is described in 
the 1921 annual report of the Commissioner General of Immigration as 
"the first strictly immigration law which provides for actual limiting the 
number of aliens ... admitted to the United States." This Act brings 

1 Number fixed by immigration law of -1921. 

2 See Cubberley, Public Education in the U. S., p. 337- 



36 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



with it a radical departure from our former immigration policy and yet it 
still allows 356,000 immigrants to enter our country each year, 153,000 of 
which may come from Southern and Eastern Europe. If this Act had come 
twenty years ago, the country would not face the problem presented by the 
great mass of unassimilated Southern and Eastern European aliens within 
our borders at the present time. The door has been closed too late, how- 
ever, and millions of these people are already with us and most of them 
are here to stay. 

The percentage of illiteracy among the foreign born is high, and the 
number of foreign-born illiterates within our borders has been rapidly 
increasing, as the accompanying table shows. 

Number of Illiterate Foreign-born in the United States 

1900 1,287,135 

1910 1,650,361 

1920 1,763,740 

In 1920 there were 1,500,000 people over ten years of age in the country 
who were unable to speak English. The number of illiterates and non- 
English-speaking aliens, however, is only a partial measure of the need for 
Americanization. One may be able to speak English sufficiently to pass the 
census enumerator, and yet not have that degree of literacy which means 
ability to comprehend the fundamental principles of our Government. To 
understand and speak English is but a step in making it possible for the 
immigrant to participate in the conduct of our National affairs. 

Many Native-born Need Americanization 

Nor is the need for Americanization limited to the foreign-born. The 
war brought home, for the first time to the average American citizen, the 
fact that foreign settlements, described as "Alien Islands," exist in various 
parts of our country. They are found both in the urban and rural sections. 
These people are often wholly out of sympathy with American ideals, but 
are not classed as aliens in any Federal census, because often they are 
removed two or three generations from the original immigrants. In 1920 
there were 16,784,299 people in the United States, one or both of whose 
parents were foreign-born. Millions of these constitute a problem of 
Americanization even more grave than that presented by the immigrant. 
Being native-born, they have the right of the ballot, and yet many of them 
attend foreign-language schools and retain the language and ideals of the 
country from which their parents or grand-parents came. The problem 
that these un-American native Americans presented by their "hyphenated" 
activities during the war is still fresh in the minds of all well-informed 
Americans. That problem is no less serious today than it was during the 
war — only less apparent. Millions of people wholly uninformed and out 
of sympathy with American ideals are living in our country. Such a 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 37 

menace cannot be safely disregarded in peaceful times. We must not wait 
until in some National crisis this great mass of unassimilated citizenry 
turns the balance in the direction of disorder and anarchy. A recent report 
on Americanization compiled by the Chamber of Commerce of the United 
States sums up the situation in the following words: "It may truly be 
said that one result of the war was to bring home to the American people 
as a whole the importance of assimilating new-comers to this country. 
War-time investigations revealed a condition which but few outside of our 
social and civic agencies had realized, such as the existence of groups or 
colonies of unassimilated immigrants, unable to speak the language of their 
adopted country, and almost totally ignorant of its manners, customs, and 
political and civic institutions." 

Thus, we see that the Americanization problem is one resulting from 
the presence in the country of millions of both foreign and native-born 
people, unassimilated so far as our language, ideals and customs are con- 
cerned. This problem is already with us. It is not a fear of the future. 
The millions of unassimilated residents within our borders will continue 
to be a factor in our National life for good or bad for many years to come. 

States Unaided Neglect Americanization 

That some States are likely to neglect this problem is practically certain. 
Simply because a State is rich and well able to meet the condition adequately 
is no guarantee that it will do so. The failure by some of our richest 
States to provide an adequate Americanization program has brought about 
the condition that exists today. Nor should this question be looked upon 
as one that merely concerns the States individually. The Federal Govern- 
ment regulates immigration and the Constitution guarantees freedom of 
movement between the States. A State, therefore, has no control over 
the number of unassimilated persons who are thrust upon it under our 
National laws. Seventy-four per cent of the foreign-born population of 
the United States is found in ten "immigrant States." * The States under 
our Federal laws, therefore, have no choice but to accept any and all whom 
the National Government chooses to admit. The problem of Americaniza- 
tion is, therefore, seen to be not only a problem of the State, but a National 
problem, both from the point of view of equity to the States and safety to 
the Nation. 

The Federal Government should do all in its power to encourage a con- 
certed attack aimed at the solution of the Americanization question. It is 
not wise for Congress to specify just how this work of Americanization 
should be carried on within the States. It can confidently be expected that 
the States, once fully aroused to its importance, will properly organize the 
work in a manner that is most likely to solve the situation as it exists within 
their borders. 



1 Schooling of the Immigrant, Thompson, p. 28. 



38 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

Bill Encourages States to Meet Problem 

Let us now consider what steps the Towner-Sterling Bill proposes should 
be taken in encouraging the States in the solution of this problem. The 
Bill contains the following provisions touching Americanization: 

"In order to encourage the States in the Americanization of immigrants 
$7,500,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized to be ap- 
propriated annually to teach immigrants fourteen years of age and over 
to speak and read the English language and to understand and appreciate 
the Government of the United States and the duties of citizenship." 
(H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 8.) 

State Initiative Fully Protected 

At the same time the following provision specifically protects the initi- 
ative of the States, leaving them free to meet the situation in the manner 
which a study of the problem within their several borders justifies. 

"All funds apportioned to a State for the Americanization of immigrants 
shall be distributed and administered in accordance with the laws of said 
State in like manner as the funds provided by State and local authorities 
for the same purpose, and the State and local educational authorities of 
said State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and methods for 
carrying out the purposes of this section within said State in accordance 
with the laws thereof." (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 8.) 

A third provision guarantees that such money as may be appropriated may 
be distributed to the States where the Americanization problem exists. 

"The said sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify under 
the provisions of this Act in the proportions which their respective foreign- 
born populations bear to the total foreign-born population of the United 
States." (Ibid., p. 7, Sec. 8.) 

Thus the Towner-Sterling Bill fully confirms the States in their Con- 
stitutional rights to control education within their several borders. At the 
same time the Federal Government exercises its well established right to 
encourage the States to meet adequately a problem that is of peculiar 
national importance. 

C. Establishing- Elective Programs of Physical Education 

Let us consider the physical condition of the manhood of the Nation as 
revealed by recent studies. It has long been recognized by a few well- 
informed specialists that there is a great annual economic loss in the 
Nation due to ill health and premature death from causes that might 
largely be prevented by effective physical education programs. The Na- 
tional Conservation Commission, appointed by President Roosevelt, in a 
report on "National Vitality," in 1909, stated that: 

. . . there were then about 3,000,000 persons seriously ill at all times in the 
United States. This meant an average annual loss per person of 13 days owing 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 39 



to illness. It was estimated that 42% of this illness was preventable, and that 
such prevention would extend the average life by over 15 years. 1 

Similar studies, in spite of the importance of their revelations, received 
but little attention until the time of the World War. The seriousness of 
the physical deficiencies prevalent among the manhood of the Nation was 
revealed at this time with unmistakable clearness. It was early recognized 
as a factor that might reduce our effectiveness in that struggle should it 
continue to the time when we would be required to place our full effective 
man-power in the field. The draft figures for rejection for physical rea- 
sons have received wide attention. Let us examine the evidence concern- 
ing the physical condition of the manhood of the Nation as revealed by 
these figures. 

The accompanying table, dealing with the rejections for physical dis- 
abilities, shows that in examining 3,208,446 men between the dates given, 
29.59 per cent "possessed physical defects of such degree as to prevent their 
qualifying for general military service." Over one-half of this group, or 
16.25 per cent of the whole number examined, "possessed physical defects 
of such degree as to prevent them from rendering military service of any 
kind." 2 

Rejections for Physical Disabilities 

Number Per cent 

Men examined, December 15, 1917, to September 11, 1918 3,208,446 100 

Men fully qualified for general military service 2,259,027 70.41 

Men disqualified for general military service 949,419 29.59 

Men qualified for limited but not general military service... 427,813 13.34 

Men disqualified wholly for any type of military service.... 521,606 16.25 

The 2,259,027 men in the table who qualified for general military serv- 
ice represent 81 per cent of all those inducted by the draft. The figures 
may, therefore, be accepted as representative for the draft as a whole. 

Revelation of Physical Defects Startling 

The figure 29.59 per cent rejected for general military service, is suffi- 
ciently startling without further elaboration. It becomes even more sig- 
nificant, however, when it is realized that all the men of this group were 
included in the ages from 21 to 30, the period of life when a man is sup- 
posed to be at his best physically. Had the examinations included those 
over 30 years of age, the per cent disqualified would doubtless have been 
materially increased. Complete figures are not available on this point, but 
a clue is shown in the table given below. 

Rejections for General Military Service — Age Factor Considered 3 

Number Number rejected Number rejected 

of men for general Per for any type Per 

Ages examined military service cent of service cent 

Group 1—21-30 Inc 2,693,448 830,401 30.83 470,457 17.47 

Group 11—21 years only.. 514,998 119,018 23.11 51,149 9.93 

1 Quoted from "Waste in Industry," Committee on Elimination of Waste in Industry of 
the Federated American Engineering Societies, appointed by Herbert Hoover. McGraw-Hill 
Book Company, Inc., 1921, p. 20. 

2 These quotations and the figures given in the table are taken from the Second Report 
of the Provost Marshal General to the Secretary of War, on the operations of the selective 
draft system to December 20, 1918, pp. 153 and 156. 

3 Ibid., p. 161. 



40 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

The men in Group I made up of those varying from 21 to 30 years of 
age showed 30.83 per cent rejections for general military service; 17.47 
per cent being absolute rejections. 

The men in Group II made up wholly of those 21 years of age yielded 
23.11 per cent rejections for general military service; 9.93 per cent being 
absolute rejections. 

The percentage of rejections for Group I, containing the men from 
21-30, is appreciably higher than the percentage of rejections for Group II 
made up of younger men. This point has not been overlooked in careful 
analyses that have been made of the draft figures. Referring to the men in 
our population over 31 years of age, none of whom are represented in the 
figures given in the accompanying tables, Dr. Eugene Lyman Fisk states : 

Sixty per cent of unfitness between 31 and 45 would be a conservative estimate 
if reasonable standards are maintained, standards that aim to exclude men who 
would almost certainly be injured and broken by war service, even though un- 
wounded. 1 

Peace-Time Standards Lowered During War 

Another important consideration in properly analyzing the figures for 
physical rejections is the standard maintained by the Draft Examining 
Boards. These were materially lowered from peace-time Army standards, 
as the following statement of the Provost Marshal General shows: 

The physical standards adopted at first for the selective service were based on 
those used by the Army under the volunteer system ... It was soon found 
that these standards were too severe. In time of peace, when the supply of vol- 
unteers ordinarily exceeds the demand, a high physical standard may be exacted. 
When a necessity exists for great numbers, many minor physical defects must 
perforce be waived in order to secure the requisite man-power. 

On request of the Provost Marshal General, a committee was therefore ap- 
pointed by the Surgeon General of the Army to formulate a new set of physical 
standards. This was completed and promulgated to draft boards in June, 1918. 2 

That the standard maintained in peace-time was lowered is indicated 
by the figures in. the table given below: 3 

Analysis of Physical Causes for Rejection for Military Service, U. S, Navy and 
Marine Corps, IQ15 {Report of Surgeon-General.) 

Per cent of 
Number men examined 

Total number of applicants 106,392 100 

Total number rejected for all causes 74,280 69.8 

Causes of rejection 

Eye 12,374 11.6 

Flatfoot 8,188 7.7 

Defective teeth 7,751 7.3 

Varicocele and varicose veins 4,598 4.3 

Deformities 4,292 4.3 

Heart affections 3,149 2.0 

Hernia, or tendency to hernia 1,647 1 . 5 

Venereal diseases 1,455 1 .4 

Ears 1,349 1.3 

Skin diseases 1,196 1 . 1 

Other miscellaneous causes 28,326 27.3 

1 "Some Lessons from the Draft Examination," Eugene Lyman Fisk, M. D., Journal of the 
American Medical Association, Feb. 2, 1918, Vol. 70, pp. 300-303. 

2 Second Report of the Provost Marshal General, p. 151. 

3 This table reproduced from: "Some Lessons from the Draft Examination, Eugene Lyman 
Fisk, M. D. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 41 



The higher standards maintained in the peace-time Navy and Marine 
Corps show a much greater percentage of rejection for physical disabilities 
than was true in connection with the draft. The figures showing the re- 
jection rate among applicants for enrollment in the Navy and Marine Corps 
are not for as representative a group as is included in the draft figures, but 
they indicate that the standard of the draft was much below that maintained 
in recruiting our peace-time war forces. 

Only Prominent Physical Defects Recorded 

One other consideration is important in properly interpreting the draft 
figures for physical rejections. Only the prominent defect was recorded 
when a man was rejected from the draft for physical reasons. A man 
might have been rejected for an eye defect who was at the same time 
suffering from an advanced case of some other disease such as tuberculosis 
or heart disease. The cause of rejection recorded in such cases, however, 
is the minor one. This fact has been clearly recognized by one student 
of the draft figures who states : 

Millions of defects, perhaps of more importance than the prominent defect, were 
submerged, in the records. 1 

The draft figures concerning rejections for physical deficiencies are, 
therefore, clearly an under-estimate of the amount of physical incompetence 
in the Nation. Let us summarize the evidence as given on this point: 

1. They concern a selected group of men all under 31 years of age. No 
data are included for men over 31 years of age for whom there would 
have been a higher percentage of rejections. 

2. The standards used in the examination were definitely lower than 
those used in peace time. The "new set of physical standards" formulated 
for the draft recognized that: "When a necessity exists for great numbers, 
many minor physical defects must perforce be waived in order to secure the 
requisite man-power. 2 

3. The draft figures give but a partial statement of the defects pos- 
sessed by those rejected. 

A proper interpretation of the draft figures for rejections for physical 
incompetence, therefore, tends to reveal them as but partial indications of 
the severe physical deficiencies of our young manhood. 

Let us next consider the specific causes for rejection as revealed by the 
draft figures, giving particular attention to the physical defects that might 
have been at least partially prevented by an adequate National physical 
education program. The reliability of these figures is probably greater 
than any others as yet compiled. 

Not only do they represent the broadest basis ever available for such an inquiry, 
but they were made under such conditions of fair uniformity, both as to time, as 

1 Preventable Diseases of Adult Life, Eugene Lyman Fisk, M. D., New York State Journal 
of Medicine, December, 1921. 

2 Second Report of the Provost Marshal General, p. 151. 



42 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



to area, and as to physical standards employed, that their scientific worth is un- 
equaled by any statistics hitherto accessible. 1 

The accompanying table tabulating the principal causes for rejection for 
physical deficiency, is based on the records for 476,694 men who were dis- 
qualified for military service. Although this number is not the total number 
of rejections made in connection with the draft they "are on a large enough 
scale to justify generalization." 2 

Defects Disqualifying for Military Service — Based on Records 
of a Total of 467,694. Rejections 3 

Per cent rejected 
Cause of rejection for cause given 

Heart and Blood Vessels 13 .07 

Bones and Joints 12.35 

Eyes 10 - 65 

Tuberculosis (Respiratory) 8.67 

Developmental Defects (Height, Weight, Chest, Muscles) 8.37 

Hernia 6 .04 

Mental deficiency ; 5.24 

Nervous disorders 5.07 

Ears 4.38 

Flatfoot 3.87 

Teeth 3.16 

Skin 2 .68 

Other defects and causes not given 16.45 

Total 100 . 00 

Defects Preventable by Proper Training 

It is the verdict of those qualified to express an opinion that most of the 
defects listed above as the causes for rejection could have been prevented 
by adequate physical education programs. 

An analysis in detail of the causes of rejection clearly indicates the preventable 
nature of these impairments, and also clearly points the way to remedial and pre- 
ventive work. 4 

Another authority makes the following statements with regard to the 
possibility of preventing the conditions that brought about the high per- 
centage of rejections. 5 

1. Heart disease could be prevented by proper strengthening of the heart through 
physical activities, by proper removal of physical defects such as bad tonsils, in- 
fected teeth, etc. 

2. Malformation of the limbs may be prevented to some extent by proper physical 
activities. 

3. Defective vision ofttimes would be prevented to some extent by proper 
physical activities. 

1 Second Report of the Provost Marshal General, p. 165;. 

a Quoted from Second Report of the Provost Marshal General, p. 165. 

3 Keport of Provost Marshal General, pp. 165 and 166. 

4 Some Lessons from the Draft Examination, Eugene Lyman Fisk, M. D. This quotation 
was not made with reference to the table given. It refers to a tabulation of the causes of 
rejection for a smaller group of men. The causes of rejection prominent in this table, however, 
are also prominent in the more comprehensive table presented here. 

5 These statements were made by Dr. C. H. Keene, Director Health Bureau, Dept. Public 
Instruction, Pennsylvania, referring to the rejections in connection with the Army Draft 
examinations. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 43 



4. Under size may be prevented by proper physical activities, by proper instruc- 
tion in regard to nutrition . . . and preparation of food and the like. 

5. Hernia undoubtedly in the majority of cases would be prevented by the de- 
velopment of abdominal muscles. This would be accomplished through physical 
education. 

6. Proper physical education and instruction in the care of the feet and selection 
of shoes, such as we have in our new syllabus in teaching of hygiene, will prevent 
a large proportion of the flat foot. 

The evidence shows, therefore, that a considerable proportion of the 
physical defects that resulted in the disqualifications of our young men 
for general military service would be preventable through a comprehensive 
National health and physical education program. 

Physical Deficiencies Due to Ignorance 

The causes of the physical deficiencies recorded as a basis for rejection do 
not mean that there is a general decadence of the race from the physical 
side. They merely indicate ignorance of the simple rules of health and 
hygiene. "An analysis in detail of the causes of rejection clearly indi- 
cates the preventable nature of these impairments." 1 

The revelations of the draft have prompted further studies of the physical 
condition of the Nation and, fortunately, have resulted in a better public 
understanding of the seriousness of the economic losses due to the physical 
deficiencies of our population. We have come to realize that it is a mis- 
take "to regard anything that does not interfere with the immediate ability 
to earn a livelihood as a negligible defect in its civil influence." 2 

Waste in Industry from Physical Deficiencies 

A recent report dealing with "Waste in Industry" gives considerable 
attention to losses resulting from ill health and premature death, and re- 
flects a better public realization of the seriousness of the physical deficiencies 
present in our population. Some of the outstanding findings of the report 
on "Waste in Industry," by a committee appointed by Herbert Hoover, 
are summarized below. Under the division of this report devoted to 
"Sources and Causes of Waste" the following are found : 3 

1. The 42,000,000 men and women gainfully employed probably lose on an 
average more than eight days each annually from illness disabilities, including non- 
industrial accidents — a total of 350,000,000 days. 

2. Of the 500,000 workers who die each year, it is probable that the death of at 
least one-half is postponable, by proper medical supervision, periodic medical ex- 
amination, health education, and community hygiene. 

3. It has been estimated that the economic loss from preventable disease and 
death is $1,800,000,000 among these classed as gainfully employed— or over 
$700,000,000 among industrial workers in the more limited meaning of the term 

there is experimental basis for the statement that this loss could be 
materially reduced and leave an economic balance in the working population alone 
over and above the cost of prevention of at least $1,000,000,000 a year. 

1 Some Lessons from the Draft Examination, Eugene Lyman Fisk, M. D. This quotation 
was not made with reference to the table given. It refers to a tabulation of the causes of 
rejection for a smaller group of men. The causes of rejection prominent in this table, how- 
ever, are also prominent in the more comprehensive table presented here. 

2 Preventable Diseases of Adult Life, Eugene Lyman Fisk, M. D., New York State Journal 
of Medicine, December, 1921. 

3 Waste in Industry, p. 21 to 23 and p. 32. 



44 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



4. The economic loss from tuberculosis death rate as affecting the working 
population is $500,000,000 annually. 

5. Malaria ... is responsible for much sub-standard health, and probably 
affects 1,500,000 people annually, covering 27,000,000 days absence. 

6. It is estimated that 25,000,000 workers have defective vision requiring correc- 
tion. It is the experience of a number of plant executives that the correction of 
sub-standard vision brings increased quality and quantity of production, sufficient 
to pay for the cost. 

7. A very large proportion of workers have defective teeth and mouth infection 
and other serious physical defects which reduces their effectiveness. 

8. The total direct cost of industrial accidents in the United States in 1919, 
including medical aid and insurance overhead, was not less than $1,014,000,000. 
Of this $349,000,000 was borne by employers and $665,000,000 by employees and 
their dependents . . . Experience indicates, and authorities agree, that 75 
per cent of these losses could be avoided. 

In this same report under the section devoted to "Recommendation for 
Elimination of Waste" we find the following significant quotation: 1 

A national policy regarding public health should be accepted and put into effect. 
The reports dealing with health . . . declare for an aggressive, continuous, 
national public health policy. 

Such a National policy is contemplated by the Towner-Sterling Bill 
which authorized Congress to appropriate annually so much of $20,000,000 
as may be necessary "to encourage the States in the promotion of physical 
■education . . . and instruction in the principles of health and sanita- 
tion." (H, R. 7, 68th Congress, Sec. 10.) 

State Autonomy Carefully Preserved 

At the same time the initiative of the State is protected in the following 
provision : 

"All funds apportioned to a State for the promotion of physical educa- 
tion shall be distributed and administered in accordance with the laws of 
said State in like manner as the funds provided by State and local au- 
thorities for the same purpose, and the State and local educational au- 
thorities of said State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and 
methods for carrying out the purposes of this section within said State in 
accordance with the laws thereof." (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 10.) 

The Towner-Sterling Bill, therefore, recognizes that the physical well- 
being of our people is a problem of National importance. It aims to 
encourage the States to join in a concerted effort to remove the causes 
back of our physical deficiencies. Such a program will many times pay 
for itself in reducing the economic losses due to ill health and premature 
death, without considering dividends in increased happiness and morale 
among our citizenry. 

D. Providing Well-qualified Teachers for All Public Schools 

There is no disagreement as to the inadequacy of the teaching personnel 
•of the Nation. It has been recognized for years. It has been estimated 



1 Waste in Industry, p. 21 to 23 and p. 32. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 45 

recently that only one fifth of the teachers of the Nation have an education 
equal to the standard of preparation recognized in all civilized countries as 
constituting the barest minimum for elementary school teaching. 1 

Let us consider some of the facts concerning the preparation of the 
teachers of the Nation. We will first consider conditions as they existed 
before the war. 

Shortage of Prepared Teachers Shown 

One of the best studies of pre-war conditions is that by Coffman made in 
1910. This study included data for a random sampling of teachers over 
the United States as found in the rural, town, and city schools of twenty- 
two States in every section of the country. The results of this study need 
not be given at length. They are well summed up in the following 
striking statement: 

Imagine the public-school teachers of the country extended in a long line. Allow- 
ing three feet of space for each individual, this line will extend unbroken for over 
three hundred miles . 

Let the first arrangement follow the order of age or maturity. The youngest 
teacher is at one end of the line, the oldest teacher at the other; the remaining 
teachers are arranged in order of age. Starting with the youngest teacher and 
journeying along the line, one will traverse one-fourth of the entire distance before 
reaching a teacher who has passed the age of twenty-one. Roughly speaking, one- 
fourth of all of the Nation's children are receiving their education at the hands 
of these immature teachers. This, however, does not tell the whole story, for one 
will have passed in all likelihood more than 100,000 teachers before reaching 
the first of the twenty-year-old group, while tens of thousands of those first en- 
countered are only sixteen, seventeen, or eighteen years old. 

Let the line form again on the basis of educational equipment as shown by the 
length of time that these teachers have themselves attended school. Now the 
journey along the line will take one past at least 30,000 teachers before one 
reaches the first individual who has had any education whatsoever beyond the 
eighth grade of the common school . . . Continuing along the line, about 
150,000 teachers would be passed before reaching the first individual whose total 
education amounted to more than two years of high-school work, and 480,000 — 
four-fifths of the entire group — would be left behind before one reached the first 
individual who had met the standard of preparation recognized in all civilized 
countries as constituting the barest minimum for elementary teaching — two years 
of training after high-school graduation, or six years of education in all beyond 
the eighth grade. 

Forming the line again on the basis of experience in teaching one would pass. 
150,000 teachers before reaching the first individual who had taught more than 
two years, while the middle of the line would be reached before one could greet 
the first "experienced" teacher — one who had taught at least four years. One-half 
of the Nation's children, then, are being taught by teachers who have not served 
sufficiently long to let the discipline of experience compensate in any marked 
degree for the deficiencies in their initial training. 2 

Surveys Reveal Serious Conditions 

Other studies give the pre-war situation in more detail as they existed in 
particular States. In 1913-14 one third of the 16,000 teachers of Wisconsin 



1 The Nation and the Schools, Keith and Bagley, p. 221. 

2 Ibid., pp. 219-221, estimates based on The Social Composition of the Teaching Population, 
Coffman. 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



had had less academic preparation than the equivalent of high-school gradu- 
ation, and practically no specific preparation for teaching. 1 Less than 40 
per cent had had training equivalent to normal-school graduation. These 
facts are particularly significant since, in comparison with most States, 
Wisconsin is well provided with standard normal-schools. 

Conditions found in Maryland were reported by a Survey Commission 
in 1915. 2 Of the white teachers of the State, 12 per cent had had no 
training but elementary school graduation, and but one in ten had com- 
pleted a standard normal-school course, or better. The training of negro 
teachers was lower than that of the white. The survey summarizes the 
situation in the following statement: 

Ten per cent of the elementary teachers of Maryland — not more — may be called 
well-trained . . . at least one-third are practically untrained. 3 

The surveys of the teachers in city school systems revealed similar data. 
Springfield, Illinois, showed that 37 per cent of the elementary teachers bad 
had no education beyond the high school, and that 14 per cent had graduated 
from no school whatsoever. 4 

In Buffalo, New York, the survey conducted in 1915 revealed the fact 
that less than one half of the elementary teachers were graduates of either 
colleges or normal schools, and that 11 per cent had not "graduated from 
any institution, not even an elementary school." 5 

The Portland, Oregon, Survey showed that 12 per cent of the teachers 
had graduated from no school. 6 

The conditions found in these States and cities were typical. Some 
surveys showed better, some worse conditions. That the teaching personnel 
contained hundreds of thousands of immature, untrained, and inexperienced 
teachers to whom teaching was but a casual and temporary occupation, was 
generally recognized. 

With the entry of the United States into the war this situation was 
greatly aggravated. Employment, in other fields, at reasonable compensa- 
tion, was easily available to all, whether trained or untrained, and as a 
result thousands of our schools closed their doors, being unable to obtain 
teachers of any kind. 

The resulting conditions in our schools during the war became a matter 
of National concern. A number of studies were made that clearly revealed 
the situation existing during the war. The results of some of these are 
given below. 

Statements made by competent authorities gave these facts concerning 
the 600,000 public-school teachers in service during the war period. 7 



1 Conditions and Needs of Wisconsin's Normal Schools, A. N. Farmer, Wisconsin State 
Board of Public Affairs, Dec, 1914. 

- Public Education in Maryland, General Education Board, New York. 

3 Ibid., p. 60. 

4 The Public Schools of Springfield, Illinois, L. P Ayres (Report of Survey). 

5 Examination of the Public School System of the City f Buffalo; Albany, 1916, p. 54. 

6 Report of the Survey of the Portland School System, 1913, p. 42. 

1 A National Program for Education, Commission Series No. 3, p. 4, N. E. A., 1918. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 47 

As to age — 

100,000 are seventeen, eighteen, and nineteen years old; 
150,000 are not more than twenty-one years old; 
300,000 are not more than twenty-five years old. 
As to length of service — 

150,000 serve in the schools two years or less; 
300,000 serve in the schoofs not more than four or five years. 
As to education — 

30,000 have had no education beyond the eighth grade of the elementary 

school ; 

100,000 have had less than two years' education beyond the eighth grade; 

200,000 have had less than four years' education beyond the eighth grade ; 

300,000 have had no more than four years' education beyond the eighth grade. 

As to professional preparation — 

300,000 have had no special professional preparation for the work of 
teaching. 

• 

Millions Taught by Unqualified Teachers 

Of the twenty million boys and girls in the public schools during the 
war, it was conservatively estimated that — 

1,000,000 are being taught by teachers whose education has been limited to 
■seven or eight years in the elementary schools; 

7,000,000 are being taught by teachers who are scarcely more than boys and 
girls themselves, and whose appreciation of their responsibilities must, in conse- 
quence of their youth and inexperience, be extremely slight; 

10,000,000 are being taught by teachers who have had no special preparation 
for their work and whose general education is quite inadequate. 1 

The seriousness of the shortage of teachers at the opening of the school 
year 1920 was revealed by investigations of the National Education Asso- 
ciation. 2 

The Bureau of Education also issued a report showing that the shortage 
of teachers was alarming. On the basis of these studies it was estimated 
that there were approximately 18,000 classrooms for which teachers could 
not be found, and that there were 450,000 boys and girls, in one school 
year, to whom school privileges were denied. So much for conditions 
existing during the war. 

Since the war a number of surveys have been made which furnish data 
concerning the preparation of teachers. A survey of Kentucky for the year 
1921, shows that ."only one elementary teacher in ten is satisfactorily pre- 
pared to teach in the elementary school ... 23 per cent have never 
gone beyond the elementary school." 3 

A more comprehensive study, the results of which are given in a table 
below, gives an estimate of the teacher training situation in twenty-eight of 
the States in the country. 



1 Ibid., p. 7. 

2 See Report by Hugh S. Magill in N. E. A. Bulletin, November, 1920, pp. 15-16. 
* Public Education in Kentucky, General Education Board, p. 53. 



48 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Preparation of Teachers x 

Per cent Per cent Per cent 
Less than High school 2 years col- 
high school education lege or nor- 
States training or more mal school 

Alabama 59 41 10 

Arizona 100 89 

Arkansas 87 . 13 12 

California 100 86 

Connecticut 100 90 

Florida 94 6 1 

Iowa 100 30 

Idaho 100 42 

Kansas 26 74 42 

Louisiana 15 85 67 

Massachusetts 7 99 86 

Mississippi 76 24 4 

Missouri - 30 70 34 

Montana 23 77 34 

Nebraska 39 61 4 

New Mexico 73 27 18 

New York 100 82 

North Carolina 51 49 23 

Ohio 8 92 42 

Oklahoma 73 27 22 

Oregon 100 79 

Pennsylvania 23 77 67 

South Carolina 40 60 35 

South Dakota... 39 61 34 

Utah -. 100 69 

Vermont 6 94 29 

Washington 100 50 

West Virginia 67 33 18 

A few of the outstanding facts brought out by this table follow : 

1. Only nine of the twenty-eight States listed have no teachers who 
have had less than a high-school education. 

2. In eight States of the Union over 50 per cent of the teachers have 
had less than a high-school education ; in Florida 94 per cent have had less 
than a high-school education. 

3. In eighteen of the twenty-eight States less than one-half of the teach- 
ers have had a normal-school education. 

It is not necessary to give further data in support of the generally recog- 
nized fact that the composition of the teaching population of the country 
is below the standard that our Nation should expect as to maturity, 
experience, and training. 

Present indications are*not encouraging in indicating any great improve- 
ment in the personnel of the teachers of the country in the immediate 
future. A recent report has shown that in spite of the "large increases in 
salaries given the teachers in the school years ending 1919 and 1920 that 
they are in a less advantageous economic position than at any other time 
since the civil war period." 2 

1 School and Society, March 18, 1922, p. 304. 

(Ed. note. — First item after Massachusetts should probably be "1 per cent.") 

2 Trends of School Costs, Russell Sage Foundation, p. 64. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 49 

Even in the cities, where the salary increases have been the greatest, 
teachers' salaries have barely held their own against the increased cost of 
living. 1 

In the rural communities the salaries of teachers are still pitifully inade- 
quate. Data based upon a recent salary inquiry sent to all rural com- 
munities of the country by the Bureau of Education, furnish evidence for 
the following statements: 

1. 17,000 teachers were reported as receiving annual salaries less than 
$500. 

2. Approximately 40,000 teachers would have been reported as receiving 
less than $500 annual salary, if all rural communities had replied and 
their returns had been similar to those actually received. 

3. In ten States from 25 to 64 per cent of the teachers in rural com- 
munities receive salaries of less than $500 annually, and hundreds of teach- 
ers received an annual salary of less than $300. 

Outlook Not Encouraging Under Present Conditions 

Under such conditions it is unlikely that there will be a great increase in 
the number of men and women desiring to enter the teaching profession, 
or that the standard of their preparation will be appreciably raised. In 
fact there is some evidence to show that the standard of preparation is lower 
now than during the war. A recent study of the preparation of high-school 
teachers, who receive the best salaries of any of our public-school teachers, 
shows that the proportion of high-school teachers who were graduates of 
colleges in the school year ending 1921 was lower in every State in the 
Union except four, than it was in the school year ending 1918. 2 

In the school year 1917-18, before the effects of the war upon our 
normal -school enrolment had been serious, there were approximately 25,000 
graduates from the normal schools of the United States each year. 3 Dur- 
ing the war there was a great decrease in the number of normal-school 
graduates. Only recently has the number of normal-school attendants 
returned to that of the pre-war figure. There is a very remote prospect 
that the number of normal-school graduates will, under present conditions, 
ever be anywhere near the demand for new teachers that comes every year. 

The Federal Commissioner of Education estimated that the number of 
recruits needed in the rural schools of the country alone, for the year 
1918-19, was 130,000. It will be seen, therefore, that the number of 
normal-school graduates was but a small fraction of the number of new 
teachers needed every year. The Federal Commissioner of Education 
estimates that there was an annual turnover of more than one in three. 
If this holds true for 1921-22, it means that for the coming school year 
over 200,000 new teachers will be needed. Our teacher-training institutions 
will graduate less than a fourth of this number. 



1 Have Teachers' Salaries Been Increased?, Journal of the National Education Association, 
April, 1922, p. 172. 

2 The Journal of the National Education Association, April, 1922, p. 170. 

3 Statistics of Normal Schools, 1917-18, U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1919, No. 81. 



50 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

We now have the facts concerning the present and probable future status 
of the teaching personnel of the country. 

We know that a return to "normal conditions" existing before the war 
means that thousands of our teachers will be lacking in maturity, experi- 
ence, and training, that the teacher-training institutions of the country 
will turn out but a fraction of the new teachers needed each year, and 
that the wage paid thousands of the teachers of the country will be so 
low that there is little hope that a sufficient number of adequately endowed 
young people will offer themselves for training. 

Efficient Schools Depend On Trained Teachers 

Along with these conditions let us realize that the effectiveness of all 
education is dependent upon the effectiveness of the teacher. The teacher 
occupies a crucial position in the educational situation. "She stands con- 
stantly on the frontier of childhood ; she deals with weak, plastic, and 
variable children." 

It is not sufficient to pass a law that illiteracy is to be removed, or 
that the principles of our Government are to be taught to the new genera- 
tion. Unless adequately prepared teachers are also provided no educational 
objective can be successfully attained. The fact that thousands of our 
children each year are being taught by teachers who but a year before 
graduated from the elementary school, and who, because of their imma- 
turity, inexperience, and lack of training, are wholly unprepared for their 
work, should not be disregarded. Such a problem is a National problem. 
It is the duty of the country to take steps to remove this condition. 

The Towner-Sterling Bill takes the first step in the direction of providing 
well-qualified teachers for the public schools of the country in the following 
provisions : 

1. That in order to encourage the States in the preparation of teachers for public- 
school service, $15,000,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized 
to be appropriated annually to provide and extend facilities for the improvement 
of teachers in service and for the more adequate preparation of prospective teach- 
ers, and to provide an increased number of trained and competent teachers by 
encouraging through the establishment of scholarships and otherwise a greater 
number of talented young persons to make adequate preparation for public-school 
service (H. R. 7, p. 10, lines 3-12). 

2. The said sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify under the pro- 
visions of this act in the proportions which the number of public-school teachers 
employed in teaching positions in the respective States bear to the total number 
of public-school teachers so employed in the United States (Ibid., p. 10, lines 12-17). 

At the same time the initiative of the States in the preparation of the 
teachers is fully protected in the following clause : 

All funds apportioned to a State for the preparation of teachers for public- 
school service shall be distributed and administered in accordance with the laws 
of said State in like manner as the funds provided by State and local authorities 
for the same purpose, and the State and local educational authorities of said 
State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and methods for carrying out 
the purposes of this section within said State in accordance with the laws thereof 
(Ibid., page 10, lines 20-25, and page 11, lines 1 and 2). 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 51 

E. Equalizing Educational Opportunity 

Our forefathers early in our history laid down the broad general principle 
that "all men are created equal." Abraham Lincoln expressed the hope 
that the time would come when our country would "guarantee to all an 
unfettered start and a fair chance in the race of life." How far we have 
fallen short in attaining this great ideal is familiar to all who are acquainted 
with the facts concerning the educational situation in the country. Let 
us note a few of the outstanding conditions illustrative of the point that 
the equality of opportunity theoretically guaranteed as a birthright to all 
Americans is, as yet, far from existing in reality. 

First, let us consider the question from the point of view of the equality 
of opportunity that is furnished our native-born citizens to acquire sufficient 
education to be classed as "literate." 

The accompanying table shows the percentage of illiteracy, divided as to 
rural or urban residence, in nine States selected to represent each geographic 
section of the country. 

Percentage of Illiterates in Rural and Urban Communities — IQ20 Census 



State Rural 

Rhode Island 2.4 

New Jersey 1.2 

Wisconsin 9 

Missouri 2.9 

Florida 4. 1 

Kentucky 8.6 

Louisiana 16.3 

Colorado 2.1 

California 7 

This table shows that illiteracy among our native-born population is 
from 2 to 8 times as great in the rural as in the urban communities. In 
the State of Louisiana, for example, among the white population, illiteracy 
is 8 times as frequent in rural as in urban communities. Considering 
negroes, in the same State, there is twice as large a percentage of illiterates 
in the rural communities as in the urban. It is plain, therefore, that the 
illiteracy of the more than 3,000,000 native-born residents of the United 
States, is primarily a rural problem, or more exactly, a rural school problem. 
Over 60 per cent of our illiterates are native-born, and over 80 per cent 
of our illiterate native population are found in rural communities. The 
inequalities in our educational system represented by our ineffective rural 
schools may, therefore, be held principally responsible for the existence of 
our present illiteracy problem. 



Native ; 
centage 

Urba 


white 

illiterate 

Ratio, 
Rural 

n to Urban 


Rural 


Negro 
Percentage illite: 

Urban 


ate 

Ratio, 

Rural 

to Urban 


.6 




4 to 1 


11.8 


10.2 


1 . 1 to 1 


.3 




4 tol 


9.1 


5.4 


1 . 7 to 1 


.3 




3 tol 


4.1 


4.1 


1 to 1 


.7 




4.1 to 1 


20.6 


9.6 


2 . 1 to 1 


.7 




5 . 8 to 1 


27.4 


12.3 


2.2tol 


1.9 




4. 5 tol 


23.0 


18.9 


1.2 tol 


2.0 




8 . 1 to 1 


45.4 


22.1 


2 . 1 to 1 


.6 




3 . 3 to 1 


10.0 


5.5 


1 . 8 to 1 


.2 




3 to 1 


8.6 


4.2 


2.0tol 



52 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Many Children Deprived of Educational Opportunities 

The children of many States do not have an equal opportunity to acquire 
that most elemental educational attainment, the ability to read and write. 
Whether a child is to reach maturity possessing this fundamental educa- 
tional attainment is in many States largely a matter of chance. If he 
happens to be reared in a rural community, his chance of being an illiterate 
is, in some States, eight times as great as if he lived in a city during 
childhood. 

The length of the school term maintained in the different local com- 
munities of any State is another good indication as to how near that State 
comes to providing equal educational opportunities for its children. It is 
obvious that any educational opportunity is dependent upon keeping the 
schools in session. 

The table below shows the inequalities in the length of school terms 
maintained in different counties of Colorado as revealed by a recent study: 

Length of School Term — Colorado Counties 1 

Name of ccunty School term in days 

Crowley 167 

Cheyenne 151 

Pueblo 141 

Montezuma 133 

Baca 98 

Similar data are given below for Virginia : 

School Terms in Virginia — Non-City Schools 2 

Length of school term Number of schools 

in months maintaining term 

5 or less 65 

6 226 

7_ 266 

8 148 

9 36 

Over 9 7 

Total__ 748 

Conditions recently found in Kentucky are well summed up in the fol- 
lowing quotation taken from a survey of Kentucky Schools, completed in 

1921: 

. . . the actual rural school term is approximately 113 days. This inadequate 
school term places rural children at a great disadvantage as compared with their 
less numerous contemporaries in city and graded districts. For example, in the 

1 Common School Finance in Colorado, and Certain Inferences of National Import; F. H. 
Swift, Journal of Educational Research, November, 1920, p. 746. 
a Virginia Public Schools, Report of Virginia Education Survey Staff, p. 293. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 53 



graded and city school districts children have, as a rule, during the eight years 
of the elementary course a total of 72 months of schooling, whereas rural children 
have ordinarily only 48 months. Working under this handicap, county children 
must either do one third more work in a given period than graded and city 
school children, or take twelve instead of eight years to complete the elementary 
school program. Few rural children are able to remain in school so long, and few 
are able to do more in a given period than their graded school and city cousins. 
The result is that rural school children are actually receiving on the average even 
less than two-thirds as much elementary education as graded and city school 
children. 1 (Italics ours.) 

Striking Inequalities Within States 

Variations in the quality of teachers provided in different communities 
of the same State are similarly striking. In Massachusetts, to select a 
State in which the support of the schools is provided principally by the 
local community, in the present school year the following inequalities exist 
in the compensation of teachers: 

Massachusetts' Average Teachers' Salaries 2 

Population of community Average annual salary 

Over 100,000 $1,589 

Villages and towns 1,126 

One-teacher rural schools 391 

It must be considered that the child taught by a teacher who can be ob- 
tained for an annual salary of $391 is not receiving an opportunity equal 
to that received by the child taught by a teacher paid an annual salary of 
$1,589. Similar inequalities, greater or less, exist in every State in the 
Union in 1921-22. 3 

Equality of Opportunity Denied 

The conditions revealed by these tables indicate that equality of educa- 
tional opportunity is a myth in many States. But in all these States at 
least some schooling is offered. The quotation given below for Arkansas 
shows that in that State no schooling whatsoever is being offered the chil- 
dren in many communities. 

In 1920, 120 Arkansas school districts levied no school tax at all. In 1921 
something over 70 pursued the same policy. The average school year per county 
varied all the way from 8 to 3 months. Needless to say that multitudes of schools 
in the counties whose average was 3 months maintained schools for one month and 
many schools were not opened at all. In the best communities in Arkansas, schools 
frequently would close in December except for the fact that they were maintained 
by the proceeds of private subscriptions and tuition fees. 

There are in Arkansas, eleven cities of 10,000 and over. In reply to an inquiry 
sent out in November, 1921, four of these eleven cities reported that their schools 
were in debt for maintenance the equivalent of one year's income or more. Six 
of the eleven replied that .they charged tuition or raised money by other unusual 
means. 4 



1 Public Education in Kentucky, Report of Kentucky Educational Commission, pp. 87 and 88. 

2 Journal of National Education Association, May, 1922, p. 216. 

3 Ibid., p. 216. 

4 Professor Fletcher Harper Swift, University of Minnesota, quoted from communication 
to National Education Association, dated April 20, 1922. 



54 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

These data are sufficient to show that children of the United States are 
not being given even approximately equal educational opportunities. If 
there is no equality in such fundamental provisions as have been dealt with 
above, there can be no equality in less essential educational provisions. 

There is a fundamental cause back of practically every illustration of 
the lack of equality of educational opportunity found within a State. This 
is the lack of a sound basis of finance for our State public schools. In 1920, 
78 per cent of the income for our public schools came from purely local 
sources. 1 Furthermore, the percentage of school expenditures coming from 
local sources has been steadily increasing. 2 

Schools Supported Principally by Local Communities 

Consequently in most States our schools are supported principally by the 
local community. Whether a school will be well supported is funda- 
mentally dependent upon the ability of the local community to support it. 
That different communities vary enormously in ability to support their 
schools has been shown by numerous studies. Below is given the result 
of a recent study made in Indiana: 3 

There is the sum of $22,086 of taxable property in one county for each person 
enumerated for school purposes as against $1,873 in another county, or $11.70 
of taxables in the former county per each child enumerated for school purposes as 
against $1 in the latter county. 

There is such an unequal distribution of wealth in Indiana that some corpora- 
tions are able to maintain their schools with a local tuition tax of S cents on 
each $100 of taxables, while other townships cannot maintain their schools the 
minimum term upon a local tuition tax of 75 cents, the legal maximum. This con- 
dition requires one citizen of Indiana to bear a tax burden fifteen times greater 
than that borne by another Indiana citizen for the education of his children. 

It is little wonder under such a situation that the following conditions 
exist in this same State : 4 

The school term in a few Indiana counties is nine months; in some others it 
is eight months ; in most others seven months ; in many others six months ; while in 
some townships it has been less than one hundred twenty days. 

There are thousands of Indiana boys and girls not within reasonable reach of 
a standard high school. Because of the financial condition of their parents, poor 
condition of roads and streams, and the scarcity of high schools in their counties, 
many of them may never hope to obtain a high school education, while in other 
counties there is a high school within easy reach of every pupil so that he can 
attend school and remain at home with his parents. 

Is it any wonder that 90 per cent of the eighth grade graduates in some counties 
enter the high school as against 18 per cent of the eighth grade graduates in other 
counties? 

Another recent study made in Iowa shows that one city in order to sup- 
port its schools must levy a tax of $15.08 on each $1,000, whereas another 
city in this State supports its schools on a tax of $1.30 on each $1,000 of 
taxable property. We also find that some cities in Iowa are spending as 

1 Based on figures furnished by U. S. Bureau of Education (manuscript not yet printed). 

2 See table on page 55. 

3 What Is Needed to Advance Indiana's School System from I7th to 1st Place, Pamphlet 
issued by Indiana Educational Campaign Committee. 

4 Ibid. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 55 

high as $125.80 a year for each pupil, whereas others spend as little as 
$37.95. 

Similar conditions revealed by a study in Pennsylvania are given below: 

Amount of Money Behind Each Child for School Purpose — 
Six Pennsylvania Counties 1 

County 

Fulton $1,260 

Sullivan 2,010 

Clearfield 2,110 

Lancaster i_ 5,190 

Northampton 5,320 

Delaware 7,670 

Some counties in Pennsylvania have over six times as much wealth to 
tax for school purposes as other counties according to this table. Simi- 
lar inequalities between towns and districts within the same county may be 
found in Pennsylvania, with the resulting inequalities in the educational 
opportunity offered. 2 

So long as such conditions exist there will never be equality of educa- 
tional opportunities offered the children of the Nation. That there is no 
equality in educational opportunity is a matter of National concern. The 
Nation is the sufferer in a very real sense. Children reaching maturity 
illiterate, and otherwise inadequately educated, cannot but be a handicap 
to the progress of the Nation. The situation is even more deserving of 
attention since under present conditions there is little hope of improvement. 
The part of the financial burden of supporting the schools that is being 
placed upon the purely local communities, as opposed to the county and 
State, is increasing. The table below shows this clearly: 

Per cent of school revenue 3 
Year from local taxes 

1890 68 

1900 67 

1910 72 

1918 : 78 

1920 78 

The provision of equal educational opportunities is fundamentally de- 
pendent on placing a smaller and smaller financial responsibility upon the 
local community within the State. Any means that will encourage the 
States to equalize educational opportunities within their borders should be 
welcomed. 

1 The Nation and the Schools, Keith and Bagley, p. 255. 

2 Ibid., p. 259. 

3 Statistics of State School Systems, 1917-18, U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1920, 
No. 11, p. 54. 



56 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Towner-Sterling Bill Equalizes Educational Opportunity 

The Towner-Sterling Bill aims to bring this about in the following pro- 
visions : 

That in order to encourage the States to equalize educational opportunities 
$50,000,000 or so much thereof as may be necessary is authorized to be appropriated 
annually to be used in public elementary and secondary schools for the partial 
payment of teachers' salaries, for providing better instruction and extended school 
terms especially in rural schools and schools in sparsely settled localities . . . 
and otherwise providing equally good educational opportunities for the children 
of the several states. (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Section 9.) 

Since unequal educational opportunities are known to exist in every State 
in the Union the following provision is contained in the Bill : 

The said sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify under the pro- 
visions of this Act one-half in the proportions which the number of children be- 
tween the ages of six and twenty-one of the respective States bears to the total 
number of such children in the United States, and one-half in the proportions 
which the number of public-school teachers employed in teaching positions in the 
respective States bears to the total number of public-school teachers so employed 
in the United States. {Ibid., Section 9.) 

The sovereignty of the State in its own borders is protected in the fol- 
lowing provision: 

All funds apportioned to a State to equalize educational opportunities shall be 
distributed and administered in accordance with the laws of said State in like 
manner as the funds provided by State and local authorities for the same purpose, 
and the State and local educational authorities of said State shall determine the 
courses of study, plans and methods for carrying out the purposes of this Section 
within said State in accordance with the laws thereof. (Ibid., Section 9.) 

The Act at the same time fixes a few minima, which have already been 
adopted by practically all States, in order that the maintenance of these 
minima may be guaranteed in all States accepting the provisions of the Act. 
These minima are given below : 

The apportionments authorized by this Section shall be made only to such 
States as by law provide: (a) A legal school term of at least twenty-four weeks 
in each year for the benefit of all children of school age in such State; {b) A 
compulsory school attendance law requiring all children between the ages of 
seven and fourteen years to attend some school for at least twenty-four weeks 
in each year; (c) That the English language shall be the basic language of in- 
struction in the common school branches in all schools, public and private. (H. R. 
7, 67th Congress, Section 9.) 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 49 

Even in the cities, where the salary increases have been the greatest, 
teachers' salaries have barely held their own against the increased cost of 
living. 1 

In the rural communities the salaries of teachers are still pitifully inade- 
quate. Data based upon a recent salary inquiry sent to all rural com- 
munities of the country by the Bureau of Education, furnish evidence for 
the following statements: 

1. 17,000 teachers were reported as receiving annual salaries less than 
$500. 

2. Approximately 40,000 teachers would have been reported as receiving 
less than $500 annual salary, if all rural communities had replied and 
their returns had been similar to those actually received. 

3. In ten States from 25 to 64 per cent of the teachers in rural com- 
munities receive salaries of less than $500 annually, and hundreds of teach- 
ers received an annual salary of less than $300. 

Outlook Not Encouraging Under Present Conditions 

Under such conditions it is unlikely that there will be a great increase in 
the number of men and women desiring to enter the teaching profession, 
or that the standard of their preparation will be appreciably raised. In 
fact there is some evidence to show that the standard of preparation is lower 
now than during the war. A recent study of the preparation of high-school 
teachers, who receive the best salaries of any of our public-school teachers, 
shows that the proportion of high-school teachers who were graduates of 
colleges in the school year ending 1921 was lower in every State in the 
Union except four, than it was in the school year ending 19 18. 2 

In the school year 1917-18, before the effects of the war upon our 
normal -school enrolment had been serious, there were approximately 25,000 
graduates from the normal schools of the United States each year. 3 Dur- 
ing the war there was a great decrease in the number of normal-school 
graduates. Only recently has the number of normal-school attendants 
returned to that of the pre-war figure. There is a very remote prospect 
that the number of normal-school graduates will, under present conditions, 
ever be anywhere near the demand for new teachers that comes every year. 

The Federal Commissioner of Education estimated that the number of 
recruits needed in the rural schools of the country alone, for the year 
1918-19, was 130,000. It will be seen, therefore, that the number of 
normal-school graduates was but a small fraction of the number of new 
teachers needed every year. The Federal Commissioner of Education 
estimates that there was an annual turnover of more than one in three. 
If this holds true for 1921-22, it means that for the coming school year 
over 200,000 new teachers will be needed. Our teacher-training institutions 
will graduate less than a fourth of this number. 

1 Have Teachers' Salaries Been Increased?, Journal of the National Education Association, 
April, 1922, p. 172. 

2 The Journal of the National Education Association, April, 1922, p. 170. 

3 Statistics of Normal Schools, 1917-18, U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1919, No. 81. 



50 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

We now have the facts concerning the present and probable future status 
of the teaching personnel of the country. 

We know that a return to "normal conditions" existing before the war 
means that thousands of our teachers will be lacking in maturity, experi- 
ence, and training, that the teacher-training institutions of the country 
will turn out but a fraction of the new teachers needed each year, and 
that the wage paid thousands of the teachers of the country will be so 
low that there is little hope that a sufficient number of adequately endowed 
young people will offer themselves for training. 

Efficient Schools Depend On Trained Teachers 

Along with these conditions let us realize that the effectiveness of all 
education is dependent upon the effectiveness of the teacher. The teacher 
occupies a crucial position in the educational situation. "She stands con- 
stantly on the frontier of childhood ; she deals with weak, plastic, and 
variable children." 

It is not sufficient to pass a law that illiteracy is to be removed, or 
that the principles of our Government are to be taught to the new genera- 
tion. Unless adequately prepared teachers are also provided no educational 
objective can be successfully attained. The fact that thousands of our 
children each year are being taught by teachers who but a year before 
graduated from the elementary school, and who, because of their imma- 
turity, inexperience, and lack of training, are wholly unprepared for their 
work, should not be disregarded. Such a problem is a National problem. 
It is the duty of the country to take steps to remove this condition. 

The Towner-Sterling Bill takes the first step in the direction of providing 
well-qualified teachers for the public schools of the country in the following 
provisions : 

1. That in order to encourage the States in the preparation of teachers for public- 
school service, $15,000,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized 
to be appropriated annually to provide and extend facilities for the improvement 
of teachers in service and for the more adequate preparation of prospective teach- 
ers, and to provide an increased number of trained and competent teachers by 
encouraging through the establishment of scholarships and otherwise a greater 
number of talented young persons to make adequate preparation for public-school 
service (H. R. 7, p. 10, lines 3-12). 

2. The said sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify under the pro- 
visions of this act in the proportions which the number of public-school teachers 
employed in teaching positions in the respective States bear to the total number 
of public-school teachers so employed in the United States {Ibid., p. 10, lines 12-17). 

At the same time the initiative of the States in the preparation of the 
teachers is fully protected in the following clause : 

All funds apportioned to a State for the preparation of teachers for public- 
school service shall be distributed and administered in accordance with the laws 
of said State in like manner as the funds provided by State and local authorities 
for the same purpose, and the State and local educational authorities of said 
State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and methods for carrying out 
the purposes of this section within said State in accordance with the laws thereof 
{Ibid., page 10, lines 20-25, and page 11, lines 1 and 2). 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 51 



E. Equalizing Educational Opportunity 

Our forefathers early in our history laid down the broad general principle 
that "all men are created equal." Abraham Lincoln expressed the hope 
that the time would come when our country would "guarantee to all an 
unfettered start and a fair chance in the race of life." How far we have 
fallen short in attaining this great ideal is familiar to all who are acquainted 
with the facts concerning the educational situation in the country. Let 
us note a few of the outstanding conditions illustrative of the point that 
the equality of opportunity theoretically guaranteed as a birthright to all 
Americans is, as yet, far from existing in reality. 

First, let us consider the question from the point of view of the equality 
of opportunity that is furnished our native-born citizens to acquire sufficient 
education to be classed as "literate." 

The accompanying table shows the percentage of illiteracy, divided as to 
rural or urban residence, in nine States selected to represent each geographic 
section of the country. 

Percentage of Illiterates in Rural and Urban Communities — IQ20 Census 

Native tvhite Negro 

Percentage illiterate Percentage illiterate 

Ratio, Ratio, 

Rural Rural 

State Rural Urban to Urban Rural Urban to Urban 

Rhode Island 2.4 .6 4 to 1 11.8 10.2 1.1 to 1 

New Jersey 1.2 .3 4 to 1 9.1 5.4 1.7 to 1 

Wisconsin 9 .3 3 to 1 4.1 4.1 1 to 1 

Missouri 2.9 .7 4.1tol 20.6 9.6 2.1tol 

Florida 4.1 .7 5.8tol 27.4 12.3 2.2tol 

Kentucky 8.6 1.9 4.5 to 1 23.0 18.9 1.2tol 

Louisiana 16.3 2.0 8.1 to 1 45.4 22.1 2.1 to 1 

Colorado 2.1 .6 3.3 to 1 10.0 5.5 1.8 to 1 

California 7 .2 3 to 1 8.6 4.2 2.0tol 

This table shows that illiteracy among our native-born population is 
from 2 to 8 times as great in the rural as in the urban communities. In 
the State of Louisiana, for example, among the white population, illiteracy 
is 8 times as frequent in rural as in urban communities. Considering 
negroes, in the same State, there is twice as large a percentage of illiterates 
in the rural communities as in the urban. It is plain, therefore, that the 
illiteracy of the more than 3,000,000 native-born residents of the United 
States, is primarily a rural problem, or more exactly, a rural school problem. 
Over 60 per cent of our illiterates are native-born, and over 80 per cent 
of our illiterate native population are found in rural communities. The 
inequalities in our educational system represented by our ineffective rural 
schools may, therefore, be held principally responsible for the existence of 
our present illiteracy problem. 



52 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Many Children Deprived of Educational Opportunities 

The children of many States do not have an equal opportunity to acquire 
that most elemental educational attainment, the ability to read and write. 
Whether a child is to reach maturity possessing this fundamental educa- 
tional attainment is in many States largely a matter of chance. If he 
happens to be reared in a rural community, his chance of being an illiterate 
is, in some States, eight times as great as if he lived in a city during 
childhood. 

The length of the school term maintained in the different local com- 
munities of any State is another good indication as to how near that State 
comes to providing equal educational opportunities for its children. It is 
obvious that any educational opportunity is dependent upon keeping the 
schools in session. 

The table below shows the inequalities in the length of school terms 
maintained in different counties of Colorado as revealed by a recent study : 

Length of School Term — Colorado Counties^- 

Name of ccunty School term in days 

Crowley 167 

Cheyenne 151 

Pueblo 141 

Montezuma 133 

Baca 98 

Similar data are given below for Virginia: 

School Terms in Virginia — Non-City Schools 2 

Length of school term Number of schools 

in months maintaining term 

5 or less 65 

6 226 

7 266 

8 148 

9 36 

Over 9 7 

Total 748 

Conditions recently found in Kentucky are well summed up in the fol- 
lowing quotation taken from a survey of Kentucky Schools, completed in 

1921: 

. . . the actual rural school terra is approximately 113 days. This inadequate 
school term places rural children at a great disadvantage as compared with their 
less numerous contemporaries in city and graded districts. For example, in the 

1 Common School Finance in Colorado, and Certain Inferences of National Import; F. H. 
.Swift, Journal of Educational Research, November, 1920, p. 746. 

2 Virginia Public Schools, Report of Virginia Education Survey Staff, p. 293. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 53 



graded and city school districts children have, as a rule, during the eight years 
of the elementary course a total of 72 months of schooling, whereas rural children 
have ordinarily only 48 months. Working under this handicap, county children 
must either do one third more work in a given period than graded and city 
school children, or take twelve instead of eight years to complete the elementary 
school program. Few rural children are able to remain in school so long, and few 
are able to do more in a given period than their graded school and city cousins. 
The result is that rural school children are actually receiving on the average even 
less than tivo-thirds as much elementary education as graded and city school 
children. 1 (Italics ours.) 

Striking Inequalities Within States 

Variations in the quality of teachers provided in different communities 
of the same State are similarly striking. In Massachusetts, to select a 
State in which the support of the schools is provided principally by the 
local community, in the present school year the following inequalities exist 
in the compensation of teachers: 

Massachusetts' Average Teachers' Salaries - 

Population of community Average annual salary 

Over 100,000 $1,589 

Villages and towns 1,126 

One-teacher rural schools 391 

It must be considered that the child taught by a teacher who can be ob- 
tained for an annual salary of $391 is not receiving an opportunity equal 
to that received by the child taught by a teacher paid an annual salary of 
$1,589. Similar inequalities, greater or less, exist in every State in the 
Union in 1921-22. 3 

Equality of Opportunity Denied 

The conditions revealed by these tables indicate that equality of educa- 
tional opportunity is a myth in many States. But in all these States at 
least some schooling is offered. The quotation given below for Arkansas 
shows that in that State no schooling whatsoever is being offered the chil- 
dren in many communities. 

In 1920, 120 Arkansas school districts levied no school tax at all. In 1921 
something over 70 pursued the same policy. The average school year per county 
varied all the way from 8 to 3 months. Needless to say that multitudes of schools 
in the counties whose average was 3 months maintained schools for one month and 
many schools were not opened at all. In the best communities in Arkansas, schools 
frequently would close in December except for the fact that they were maintained 
by the proceeds of private subscriptions and tuition fees. 

There are in Arkansas, eleven cities of 10,000 and over. In reply to an inquiry 
sent out in November, 1921, four of these eleven cities reported that their schools 
were in debt for maintenance the equivalent of one year's income or more. Six 
of the eleven replied that they charged tuition or raised money by other unusual 
means. 4 



1 Public Education in Kentucky, Report of Kentucky Educational Commission, pp. 87 and 88. 

2 Journal of National Education Association, May, 1922, p. 216. 

3 Ibid., p. 216. 

4 Professor Fletcher Harper Swift, University of Minnesota, quoted from communication 
to National Education Association, dated April 20, 1922. 



54 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

These data are sufficient to show that children of the United States are 
not being given even approximately equal educational opportunities. If 
there is no equality in such fundamental provisions as have been dealt with 
above, there can be no equality in less essential educational provisions. 

There is a fundamental cause back of practically every illustration of 
the lack of equality of educational opportunity found within a State. This 
is the lack of a sound basis of finance for our State public schools. In 1920, 
78 per cent of the income for our public schools came from purely local 
sources. 1 Furthermore, the percentage of school expenditures coming from 
local sources has been steadily increasing. 2 

Schools Supported Principally by Local Communities 

Consequently in most States our schools are supported principally by the 
local community. Whether a school will be well supported is funda- 
mentally dependent upon the ability of the local community to support it. 
That different communities vary enormously in ability to support their 
schools has been shown by numerous studies. Below is given the result 
of a recent study made in Indiana: 3 

There is the sum of $22,086 of taxable property in one county for each person 
enumerated for school purposes as against $1,873 in another county, or $11.70 
of taxables in the former county per each child enumerated for school purposes as 
against $1 in the latter county. 

There is such an unequal distribution of wealth in Indiana that some corpora- 
tions are able to maintain their schools with a local tuition tax of 5 cents on 
each $100 of taxables, while other townships cannot maintain their schools the 
minimum term upon a local tuition tax of 75 cents, the legal maximum. This con- 
dition requires one citizen of Indiana to bear a tax burden fifteen times greater 
than that borne by another Indiana citizen for the education of his children. 

It is little wonder under such a situation that the following conditions 
exist in this same State : 4 

The school term in a few Indiana counties is nine months; in some others it 
is eight months ; in most others seven months ; in many others six months ; while in 
some townships it has been less than one hundred twenty days. 

There are thousands of Indiana boys and girls not within reasonable reach of 
a standard high school. Because of the financial condition of their parents, poor 
condition of roads and streams, and the scarcity of high schools in their counties, 
many of them may never hope to obtain a high school education, while in other 
counties there is a high school within easy reach of every pupil so that he can 
attend school and remain at home with his parents. 

Is it any wonder that 90 per cent of the eighth grade graduates in some counties 
enter the high school as against 18 per cent of the eighth grade graduates in other 
counties? 

Another recent study made in Iowa shows that one city in order to sup- 
port its schools must levy a tax of $15.08 on each $1,000, whereas another 
city in this State supports its schools on a tax of $1.30 on each $1,000 of 
taxable property. We also find that some cities in Iowa are spending as 



1 Based on figures furnished by U. S. Bureau of Education (manuscript not yet printed). 

2 See table on page 55. 

3 What Is Needed to Advance Indiana's School System from nth to 1st Place, Pamphlet 
issued by Indiana Educational Campaign Committee. 

4 Ibid. 



Extension of Federal Aid for Promotion of Education 55 



high as $125.80 a year for each pupil, whereas others spend as little as 

$37.95. 

Similar conditions revealed by a study in Pennsylvania are given below : 

Amount of Money Behind Each Child for School Purpose — 
Six Pennsylvania Counties 1 

County 

Fulton $1,260 

Sullivan 2,010 

Clearfield 2,110 

Lancaster 5,190 

Northampton 5,320 

Delaware 7,670 

Some counties in Pennsylvania have over six times as much wealth to 
tax for school purposes as other counties according to this table. Simi- 
lar inequalities between towns and districts within the same county may be 
found in Pennsylvania, with the resulting inequalities in the educational 
opportunity offered. 2 

So long as such conditions exist there will never be equality of educa- 
tional opportunities offered the children of the Nation. That there is no 
•equality in educational opportunity is a matter of National concern. The 
Nation is the sufferer in a very real sense. Children reaching maturity 
illiterate, and otherwise inadequately educated, cannot but be a handicap 
to the progress of the Nation. The situation is even more deserving of 
attention since under present conditions there is little hope of improvement. 
The part of the financial burden of supporting the schools that is being 
placed upon the purely local communities, as opposed to the county and 
State, is increasing. The table below shows this clearly : 

Per cent of school revenue 3 
Year from local taxes 

1890 68 

1900 67 

1910 72 

1918 78 

1920 78 

The provision of equal educational opportunities is fundamentally de- 
pendent on placing a smaller and smaller financial responsibility upon the 
local community within the State. Any means that will encourage the 
States to equalize educational opportunities within their borders should be 
welcomed. 

1 The Nation and the Schools, Keith and Bagley, p. 255. 

3 StatYstics 25 o 9 f State School Systems, 1917-18, U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1920, 
No. n, p. 54. 



56 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Towner-Sterling Bill Equalizes Educational Opportunity 

The Towner-Sterling Bill aims to bring this about in the following pro- 
visions : 

That in order to encourage the States to equalize educational opportunities 
$50,000,000 or so much thereof as may be necessary is authorized to be appropriated 
annually to be used in public elementary and secondary schools for the partial 
payment of teachers' salaries, for providing better instruction and extended school 
terms especially in rural schools and schools in sparsely settled localities . . . 
and otherwise providing equally good educational opportunities for the children 
of the several states. (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Section 9.) 

Since unequal educational opportunities are known to exist in every State 
in the Union the following provision is contained in the Bill : 

The said sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify under the pro- 
visions of this Act one-half in the proportions which the number of children be- 
tween the ages of six and twenty-one of the respective States bears to the total 
number of such children in the United States, and one-half in the proportions 
which the number of public-school teachers employed in teaching positions in the 
respective States bears to the total number of public-school teachers so employed 
in the United States. {Ibid., Section 9.) 

The sovereignty of the State in its own borders is protected in the fol- 
lowing provision : 

All funds apportioned to a State to equalize educational opportunities shall be 
distributed and administered in accordance with the laws of said State in like 
manner as the funds provided by State and local authorities for the same purpose, 
and the State and local educational authorities of said State shall determine the 
courses of study, plans and methods for carrying out the purposes of this Section 
within said State in accordance with the laws thereof. {Ibid., Section 9.) 

The Act at the same time fixes a few minima, which have already been 
adopted by practically all States, in order that the maintenance of these 
minima may be guaranteed in all States accepting the provisions of the Act. 
These minima are given below : 

The apportionments authorized by this Section shall be made only to such 
States as by law provide: [a) A legal school term of at least twenty-four weeks 
in each year for the benefit of all children of school age in such State; {b) A 
compulsory school attendance law requiring all children between the ages of 
seven and fourteen years to attend some school for at least twenty-four weeks 
in each year; (c) That the English language shall be the basic language of in- 
struction in the common school branches in all schools, public and private. (H. R. 
7, 67th Congress, Section 9.) 



THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 

TO THE STATES AS SET UP IN THE 
TOWNER-STERLING BILL 

Having considered the fundamental reasons for organizing a Department 
of Education and for extending the principle of Federal aid to specific types 
of public education that have a particular national significance, we come 
to another fundamental issue ; viz., can the foregoing be accomplished with- 
out interfering with State control of public education, and yet provide 
sufficient safeguard from the national point of view? 

Objections to Towner-Sterling Bill Stated 

In order to answer this question adequately let us summarize the funda- 
mental contentions of those who are opposed to the Towner-Sterling Bill. 
They are as follows: 

1. The Towner-Sterling Bill creates a Secretary of Education who is 
given autocratic power to control public education in the several States. 

2. The subsidy feature of the Bill, being on the 50-50 basis, guarantees 
that the States will, for the sake of getting the subsidies, be willing to do 
whatever the autocratic Secretary of Education may demand. 

3. The nationalization of education and of the teaching force will go on 
until we shall have a huge bureaucratic machine at Washington having its 
Secretary of Education in the Cabinet, its Assistant Secretaries of Educa- 
tion and a horde of bureau chiefs and clerks and three-quarters of a million 
of Federal employees teaching in the schools and bossed by several thousand 
field inspectors, supervisors, and other petty traveling officials. 

4. If the advocates of the Towner-Sterling Bill take the other horn 
of the dilemma ; viz., that there will be no such measure of control, they 
find themselves in an awkward position, for without control there will 
be tremendous waste of Federal funds. 

5. When the Federal Government begins by setting up standards, no 
matter how good or necessary they may be, and giving someone the power 
to withhold appropriations, it furnishes a very solid foundation for the super- 
structure of Federal control. 

These contentions are not supported nor justified by a fair interpretation 
of the Towner-Sterling Bill. They are merely fearful imaginings wrongly 
referred to the Towner-Sterling Bill. Let us consider them seriatim: 

Objections to Towner-Sterling Bill Answered 

1. The Towner-Sterling Bill does not give the Secretary of Education 
any power to control education in the several States. He is naturally given, 
as is every other Secretary, "charge in the buildings and premises occupied 
by or assigned to the Department of Education." (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, 
Sec. 4.) Also the following: "All power and authority conferred by law 
upon the head of any executive department, or upon any administrative 

[571 



58 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

board, over any officer, office, bureau, division, board, or branch of the 
Government, transferred in accordance with the provisions of this Act to 
the Department of Education, shall, after such transfer, be vested in the 
Secretary of Education." (Ibid., 67th Congress, Sec. 4.) 

In the foregoing there is no hint of power to control education in the 
several States. 

The Secretary of Education is authorized to conduct studies and investi- 
gations in the field of education, but this gives him no control over education 
in the States. (Ibid., Sec. 5.) 

We find that the Secretary of Education "shall apportion to said State 
for the ensuing fiscal year such funds as said State may be entitled to receive 
under the provisions of this Act, and shall certify such apportionment or 
apportionments to the Secretary of the Treasury." (Ibid., Sec. 13.) 

"The Secretary of Education is authorized to prescribe plans for keeping 
accounts of the expenditures of such funds as may be apportioned to 
the States under the provisions of this Act and to audit such accounts." 
(Ibid., Sec. 14.) If the Secretary of Education shall determine that "the 
apportionment or apportionments made to a State for the current fiscal year 
are not being expended in accordance with the provisions of this Act, he 
shall give notice in writing to the chief educational authority designated to 
represent said State, and to the Governor of said State, in duplicate, stating 
specifically wherein said State fails to comply with the provisions of this 
Act. If, after being so notified, a State fails to comply with the provisions 
of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall report thereon to Congress not 
later than in his next annual report." (Ibid., Sec. 14.) 

The foregoing, we submit, do not give the Secretary of Education any 
autocratic power over education in the several States. 

There is, however, one more provision in the Bill, found in Section 16. 
It reads as follows : 

That the chief educational authority designated to represent a State receiving 
any of the appropriations made under the provisions of this Act, shall, not later 
than September 1 of each year, make a report to the Secretary of Education show- 
ing the work done in said State in carrying out the provisions of this Act, during 
the next preceding fiscal year, and the receipts and expenditures of money ap- 
portioned to said State under the provisions of this Act. If the chief educational 
authority designated to represent a State shall fail to report as herein provided, 
the Secretary of Education may discontinue all apportionments to said State until 
such report shall have been made. 

This is simply the safeguarding of the funds belonging to all of us and 
given to a State as trustee and to be used for a specified purpose. It is 
simply business principles applied to the expenditure of public funds — an 
arrangement that every right-minded person should approve. 

And finally, to clinch the whole matter and to reveal the full intent 
of the Towner-Sterling Bill the following is found therein : 

All the educational facilities encouraged by the provisions of this Act and ac- 
cepted by a State shall be organized, supervised, and administered exclusively bv 
the legally constituted State and local educational authorities of said State, and 



Relationship of the Federal Government to the States 59 

the Secretary of Education shall exercise no authority in relation thereto; and this- 
Act shall not be construed to imply Federal control of education within the States,. 
nor to impair the freedom of the States in the conduct and management of their 
respective school systems. (Section 13.) 

To assume that, in the face of such clear language, the Secretary of 
Education would nevertheless and inevitably become an autocratic overlord,, 
is as unfair as it is preposterous. Such an assumption is equivalent to saying 
that statute law is futile, even when supported by the specific provisions 
of the Constitution of the United States. 

We submit that the evidence found in the structure of the Towner- 
Sterling Bill itself, and the unequivocal statements of the authors and 
sponsors of the bill in Congress, Judge Towner and Senator Sterling, 
completely refutes the inference that it is the purpose of the Bill to give 
to the Secretary of Education autocratic power over education in the 
States, and we further submit that no evidence has been submitted which 
proves that a thing so at variance with the intent and language of the 
Bill will inevitably, or even probably, result from it. 

2. There is no evidence in the Bill, that the subsidy feature will lead 
the States to surrender their rights to organize, supervise, and administer 
public education, nor is there any fund of human experience that warrants 
any such conclusion. 

Towner-Sterling Bill Avoids Weakness in Smith-Hughes Act 

The Towner-Sterling Bill avoids the one feature of the Smith-Hughes 
Act that has been the cause of much trouble and misunderstanding. The 
Smith-Hughes Act, in Section 8, provides: "That in order to secure the 
benefits of the appropriation for any purpose specified in this Act, the State 
Board shall prepare plans, showing the kinds of vocational education for 
which it is proposed that the appropriations shall be used ; the kind of 
schools and equipment; courses of study; and, in the case of agricultural 
subjects, the qualifications of supervisors or directors; plans for the train- 
ing of teachers; and, in the case of agricultural subjects, plans for the 
supervision of agricultural education as provided for in section ten. Such 
plans shall be submitted by the State Board to the Federal Board for 
Vocational Education, and if the Federal Board finds the same to be in 
conformity with the provision and purposes of this Act, the same shall be 
approved." 

The foregoing is not found in the Towner-Sterling Bill at all. It is too 
detailed" and too prescriptive. As opposed to the foregoing, the Towner- 
Sterling Bill provides that all such details shall be decided "by the properly 
constituted State and local educational authorities." 

Why should a State give up its right to control public education within 
its own borders? The Towner-Sterling Bill does not require it as a con- 
dition antecedent to the receipt of the Federal aid provided in the Bill. 
The Bill expressly confirms the power of the several States to control public 



■60 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

education within their own borders. The Bill expressly states, in its text, 
the implications of the Federal Constitution as to this matter. 

Moreover, the Bill does not set up or propose a "50-50 basis" for all 
forms and varieties of public education. The incentive of Federal aid is 
strictly limited to the five fields of public education in which the States 
Tiave failed to do what National safety, National welfare, and National 
advancement demand. And this Federal aid is set up simply as incentive, 
not as an agreement on the part of the Federal Government to pay one-half 
of the expenses of carrying on public education in these five fields. The 
Bill expressly obligates a State to spend at least as much as it receives from 
ihe Federal Government in each of the five fields which it agrees to carry 
on. The States are free to spend as much more as thev desire. 

Experience Proves Federal Aid Stimulates States 

Experience shows that the distribution principle of the Bill operates to 
■stimulate the State. The way in which Federal aid has operated to in- 
crease expenditures by States for State Colleges of Agriculture and Mechanic 
Arts is seen in the fact that appropriations by States for these institutions 
increased eight fold in the nineteen years following 1896, while the appro- 
priations of State owned, controlled, and operated Normal Schools, receiv- 
ing no Federal aid, increased only three fold in the same time. The ap- 
propriations per student enrolled increased 128 per cent and 60 per cent 
respectively. 1 

It may be objected that reasons other than Federal aid were involved 
in this matter. Such reasons certainly did not operate with regard to 
Federal aid for Vocational Education. In 1916, the year before the passage 
of the Smith-Hughes Act, there were only fifteen States that made appro- 
priations for Vocational Education. In 1921, forty-eight States made 
appropriations for this purpose. In 1916, the fifteen States appropriated 
$1,300,510.15 for Vocational Education, while in 1921, a total of 
$5,319,216.91 was appropriated by States for this purpose. In 1916 local 
appropriations, amounting to $2,118,208.96 for Vocational Education by 
twenty States. In 1921 forty-six States made local appropriations amount- 
ing to $9,057,985.09 for the same purpose. When the combination of 
State and local appropriations are considered together we get the full 
force of the incentive which is supplied by Federal aid. In 1916 there was 
available in twenty-two States a total of $3,418,719.11 for vocational edu- 
cation. In 1921 there was available in forty-eight States a total of 
$14,377,202.00 for Vocational Education. When the Federal appropria- 
tion of $3,097,932.02 is added to the foregoing we find that a grand total 
of $17,475,134.02 was available for Vocational Education in 1921 as 
against $3,418,719.11 for the same purpose in 1916. 

The poor, as well as the rich States, under the stimulus of Federal en- 
couragement, greatly increased the funds available for Vocational Educa- 

1 N. E. A. Commission Series No. .?, p. 14. 



Relationship of the Federal Government to the States 61 

tion. Even in Mississippi, one of the poorest States, the sum provided for 
Vocational Education was increased from $5,000 in 1916 to $174,184.30; 
in 1921. If Georgia could receive from the Federal Government $775,- 
350.94 for the removal of illiteracy on the condition that it raise an equiva- 
lent amount by State and local taxation for the same purpose, it is probable 
that adult illiteracy would disappear very rapidly. If Massachusetts could 
receive $587,880.98 for Americanizing its foreign-born residents, on the 
condition that it raise an equal amount for the same purpose, it is probable 
that its Americanization activities would be greatly and speedily increased,, 
for in Massachusetts, under the stimulus of the Smith-Hughes Act, the 
funds available for Vocational Education were increased from $820,892. 1 3> 
in 1916 to $3,026,934.37 in 1921. 1 

The real question at issue is not the inequality in the per capita wealth 
cf our several States. The question is whether the people everywhere are 
willing to give through State and local taxation alone the money that is 
necessary to support such an educational program as the safety, perpetuity, 
and advancement of our Nation demands. Evidently they have not been 
willing to do so up to the present time. If they had, the existing defects, 
that cannot be denied or controverted, would not be "crying aloud in the 
appealing voices of children" for remedy. 

In the face of such facts and conditions, the Towner-Sterling Bill pro- 
poses to extend what has already proved wise and successful: viz., the prin- 
ciple of Federal aid. 

States Will Not Surrender Their Control 

The Federal appropriations for good roads on the so-called 50-50 basis. 
have stimulated the States to go far beyond equalling the Federal aid 
granted for this purpose. As yet, no State has ever thought of giving up 
the control of its highways simply because the Federal Government has 
helped financially in their construction. 

The mere repetition of the assertion that Federal aid on a 50-50 basis 
will lead the States to give up their Constitutional control of education 
is not proof. Our experience is conclusively to the contrary. The end 
sought by the Towner-Sterling Bill is the stimulation of the States to do 
effective work in the five specified fields. The doing of this will result in 
great National benefit. It is but fair that the Nation should help toward 
the payment of the expenditures necessary to the securing of this national 
benefit. If a lighthouse in Boston Harbor can be built at National expense 
on the ground of National benefit, every expenditure contemplated in the 
Towner-Sterling Bill can be defended on exactly the same basis. 

Therefore, the entire argument of the opponents of the Towner-Sterling 
Bill, regarding the pernicious and deadly effect of the basis on which it is 
proposed to distribute Federal aid to the States, is faulty. There is to be 

1 These figures as to expenditures for Vocational Education are based on reports received 
from forty-eight State Directors of Vocational Education received in May, 1922, by the 
National Society for Vocational Education. 



62 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

no autocratic Secretary of Education and therefore there will be no person 
seeking, and no situation designed, to bribe and induce the States to give 
up their present control over public education within their own borders. 

Nationalization of Education Not Possible Under Bill 

3. The Towner-Sterling Bill does not contemplate, nor even make pos- 
sible, the nationalization of education and of the teaching force of the 
public schools. If the Bill did contemplate any such thing, the opponents 
would be able to point out the language of the Bill or the relationships set 
up in the Bill which really look toward or hint at such a calamity. This 
they are unable to do. 

What does the nationalization of education mean ? It can mean but one 
thing, viz., organizing and controlling public education as it is organized 
and controlled in those nations which control public education. The 
Towner-Sterling Bill confirms our present constitutional control of public 
education by the States. It therefore takes a distinct, definite, and positive 
stand against the nationalization of education. 

What does the "nationalization of the teaching force" mean? It can 
mean but one thing, viz., employing teachers by the Nation and thus mak- 
ing them National employees. This is not the case now. The Towner- 
Sterling Bill confirms the existing situation as regards the employment of 
teachers by the properly constituted educational officers of the several 
States. Therefore, the Towner-Sterling Bill takes a distinct, definite, and 
positive stand against the "nationalization of the teaching force." 

The assertions of the opponents of the Towner-Sterling Bill about a 
horde of Bureau chiefs and clerks and several thousand field inspectors, 
supervisors, and other petty traveling officials are wild flights of imagina- 
tion invoked to frighten those who do not understand the provisions of the 
Towner-Sterling Bill. The whole conception of "nationalizing education 
and the teaching force" has been conjured up as an argument against the 
Towner-Sterling Bill without any relation to the provisions of the Bill 
itself. 

Neither Autocratic Control Nor Extravagant Waste 

4. The opponents of the Bill take the position that unless there is abso- 
lute autocratic control, there must inevitably be extravagant waste because 
of the entire absence of control. 

The fallacy in this position is in the ambiguity of the word control. In 
one sense this word means absolute authority over or absolute regulation of. 
In another sense it means guidance according to definite, agreed-upon 
standards. For example, a Legislature controls the appropriations for a 
State University by voting for the use of the institution a specified sum of 
money for operating expenditures. It does not, however, specify exactly 
how many tons of coal may be bought nor what brand of chalk or ink 
shall be purchased. The Legislature also controls the broad, general pol- 



Relationship of the Federal Government to the States 63 

icies of the institution by declaring what schools, or divisions, or depart- 
ments it may operate. No State University would undertake to establish 
a Law School, or a Medical School without legislative authorization. It 
would not expect, however, that the Legislature would go on to specify in 
detail just what courses should be included in the curriculum, just what 
teachers should be employed, just what qualifications these teachers should 
have, just how many hours they should teach each week, just what text- 
books should be used, just what lesson should be assigned, and just how the 
students should be graded. When, however, "autocratic control" is used 
by opponents of the Bill, it is just such detailed regulation that is implied 
and is brought to mind. All of the foregoing things and a multitude of 
others must be decided by someone. The implication is that they must 
be decided by the one who is boss — the one who controls. In the case of 
the Towner-Sterling Bill, the proposed Secretary of Education is made 
into the imagined ogre. This idea of an "autocratic" overlord in educa- 
tion, who constantly interferes with the machinery of State and local edu- 
cational procedures, is kept in the foreground. Then, as if realizing that 
the picture is overdrawn, the brief in opposition tries to hang the whole 
proposal of the Towner-Sterling Bill on the other alternative of "no con- 
trol at all" and pictures the result as "tremendous, extravagant waste." 
It is not necessary to make a choice between these two extremes. There 
is a sane middle ground. This the Towner-Sterling Bill recognizes. It 
is not the embodiment of the principle of autocratic control nor of the 
principle of laissez faire. It takes the middle ground. The Bill sets up 
certain things which the Secretary of Education may do. By implication 
and by a long line of legal decisions, he cannot do what he is not authorized 
to do. He is not authorized to control education in the States. There- 
fore, he cannot control it. 

The Towner-Sterling Bill sets up certain conditions under which Fed- 
eral aid for specific purposes may be given to the States. No State is 
coerced into accepting these conditions. If they are accepted, the State is 
morally and legally bound to live up to them in good faith, because accept- 
ance of these conditions constitutes a contract between the Federal Govern- 
ment and the State. 

Government Will Audit Expenditure of Federal Money 

When such a contract has been entered into, the Federal Government 
has, according to the provisions of the Towner-Sterling Bill, the right to 
audit the expenditures of the State to see that the money allotted by the 
Federal Government has been spent for the specific purpose in question and 
that at least an equal amount has been spent by the State or local units 
for the same specific purpose. This is neither the "autocratic control" nor 
the utter absence of control which the opposition sets up as the only logical 
alternatives. It is simply the middle ground of common sense, or the ap- 
plication of the principle of the square deal. 



64 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

There has undoubtedly been "extravagant waste" of lands granted to the 
State in aid of education. It is not advisable (nor is it proposed) to make 
annual, outright gifts to the States for any educational purpose, however 
important this educational purpose may be nationally. We have already 
reached the time when bounties should not be given. Free gifts by the 
Federal Government are, or should be wholly impossible. The utter de- 
nial of Federal aid is not the only alternative course. The Towner-Sterl- 
ing Bill proposes simply that measure of control which is safe and fair to 
the Federal Government and to the several States. It proposes an emi- 
nently fair and equitable plan of assuring each and all of us that our money 
is being expended by the several States for the specific purposes for which it 
was allotted and in accordance with the terms of a contract freely entered 
upon. Any more control than this is a clear invasion of the rights of the 
States. Any less control than this is indefensible. It is the measure and 
form of control which fair dealing demands. 

5. Finally, the opponents of the Bill take the position that setting up 
standards, no matter how good or necessary they may be and "giving some- 
one the power to withhold appropriations furnishes a very solid foundation 
for the superstructure of Federal control." 

Let us examine these standards critically to see if there is any possibility 
of their development into the substance of Federal control. These stand- 
ards are : 

Standards of Towner-Sterling Bill Considered 

A. Each State must appropriate and use as much for a given specific 
purpose as it receives for this purpose from the Federal Government. 

This becomes a part of the contractual relation between the Federal 
Government and the States accepting the terms of the Bill. This con- 
tractual relation cannot be changed except by mutual consent. Therefore,, 
it does not promise anything in the way of Federal control. 

B. In order to receive an allotment for the equalization of educational 
opportunities, each State must agree to : 

(a) Have all of its public schools open for at least six months. 

(b) Enact and enforce a compulsory attendance law. 

(c) Provide by law that the basal instruction in all schools, both 
public and private, shall be in the English language. 

We submit that no one of these requirements taken alone constitutes 
Federal control of public education within the states, nor do they col- 
lectively look toward Federal control. 

The Federal Government desires to have the States equalize educational 
opportunities within their several borders more fully and more adequately 
than they have done. It sets up certain allotments as incentive and induce- 
ment. It also sets up the three conditions that have been enumerated as 
necessary to equality of educational opportunity. It would be foolish to 
make an outright gift to the States for any purpose. In the interest of 



Relationship of the Federal Government to the States 65 



justice and fair play, all monies appropriated from the Federal Treasury- 
should be spent for the purposes for which the appropriation is made. It 
is idle to call this sensible, sane safeguarding of the national interest "the 
very solid foundation for the superstructure of Federal control." The ap- 
propriations to and the conditions set up for Colleges of Agriculture and 
Mechanic Arts do not operate, as the years go by, to bring these institutions 
more and more under Federal control. The highways to whose construc- 
tion the Federal Government has contributed have not fallen under Fed- 
eral control. There is such a thing as genuine cooperation that is mutually 
advantageous and that is free from all taint of domination by either party. 
It is such cooperation, with no hint or promise of Federal control, that is 
embodied in the standards set up by the Towner-Sterling Bill. 

To say that there should be no terms or conditions set up in a cooper- 
ative agreement is equivalent to saying that the foundation for misunder- 
standing should be embodied in the contract. To say that the setting up 
of any terms whatever means the domination of one party or the other is 
not a justifiable conclusion. 

C. Each State must, through its chief educational officer, report an- 
nually to the Secretary of Education (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 16) 
"showing the work done in said State in carrying out the provisions of 
this Act during the next preceding fiscal year, and the receipts and expendi- 
tures of money apportioned to said State under the provisions of this Act. 
If the chief educational authority designated to represent a State shall fail 
to report as herein provided, the Secretary of Education may discontinue 
all apportionment to said State until such report shall have been made." 
Anything less than this would not assure all of us that our money was 
being faithfully expended, but it does not mean "a very solid foundation 
for the superstructure of Federal control." 

D. In order to secure comparable reports from all of the States, "the 
Secretary of Education is authorized to prescribe plans for keeping ac- 
counts of the expenditures of such funds as may be apportioned to the 
States under the provisions of this Act." (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, 
Sec. 14.) The general public could never know how its funds were 
being spent by the States unless there were some such plan. The plan 
simply amounts to a uniform accounting system with regard to the allot- 
ments of the Federal aid that is provided in the Towner-Sterling Bill, and 
is not the autocratic domination held up by the brief in opposition. 

E. The Secretary of Education is also authorized to "audit such ac- 
counts" in the several States. If the audit shows that a State is not expend- 
ing its allotments in accordance with the terms of its contract with the 
Federal Government, the Secretary of Education is to give notice to the 
State's chief educational officer and to the State's Governor, in duplicate, 
stating specifically wherein the State has failed to comply with the contract. 
If the State fails to comply after such notice, the Secretary of Education 



66 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



must report the matter to Congress "not later than in his next annual 
report." (H. R. 7, 67th Congress, Sec. 14.) 

These provisions assure us that the Secretary of Education will have to be 
reasonable and sensible in dealing with the States. If, however, a State is 
unreasonable or careless in its handling of Federal funds, the case is re- 
ported to Congress for decision. How such a reasonable relationship can 
ever become "the very solid foundation for the superstructure of Federal 
control" is unthinkable. 

Position of Supporters of Bill Wrongly Stated 

We wish to call attention to two positions wrongly assigned to the sup- 
porters of the Towner-Sterling Bill by those who oppose it. The opponents 
of the Bill have stated : 

1. That the proponents of the Towner-Sterling Bill claim that our edu- 
cational system has broken down. 

2. That the proponents of the Towner-Sterling Bill claim that some 
States are too poor to provide suitable schools for their children. 

Both of these statements are straw men set up by the opponents of the 
Bill. Much is made of these points in an effort to convince those unin- 
formed that if these two alleged claims can be disproved a conviction against 
the necessity and wisdom of the Towner-Sterling Bill would be created 
thereby; Neither of these claims is advanced by the proponents of the 
Towner-Sterling Bill. 

The most that was ever said by anybody at a hearing on the Towner- 
Sterling Bill was that there was, during the war, "a threatened breakdown 
of our educational system." This language was warranted by the facts 
then existing. It is a far cry from such a statement to the charge that the 
proponents of the Towner-Sterling Bill assert that our educational system 
has broken down. The advocates of the Towner-Sterling Bill make no 
such assertion. We recognize the development that has taken place in our 
educational systems ; we recognize the excellencies of our schools. This, 
however, cannot blind us to existing educational shortcomings and defects. 
It is true that our public schools are not responsible for the illiterates who 
are here, for the foreigners who cannot speak our language, for the lack of 
attention to remediable physical defects, for poorly qualified teachers, nor 
for inequalities in educational opportunity. The several States which 
exercise sovereign control over education are responsible for this situation. 
These sovereign States have not organized public educational systems ade- 
quate to the needs of our National life. An illiterate is an illiterate 
wherever found. A non-English speaking alien is un-Americanized no 
matter where he lives. A poorly prepared teacher, whether teaching in a 
city school or a rural school, is still a poorly prepared teacher. 

The States are sovereign in educational matters. They cannot be 
coerced, but they may be encouraged to perform their solemn obligations 
to the Nation. The problem is not a sectional one. Massachusetts needs 



Relationship of the Federal Government to the States 67 



encouragement in Americanization, just as Mississippi needs it for the re- 
moval of illiteracy. In spite of our progress we are a Nation of sixth 
graders. 1 The ideals of our democracy cannot be realized on this level of 
intelligence. 

Now as to the second straw man set up by the opponents of the Bill, that 
its supporters claim that some of the States are too poor to provide suitable 
schools for their children. 

This is not the position of the advocates of the Towner-Sterling Bill. 
There is no doubt that the per capita wealth in the several States shows 
wide variations. To raise $50:00 for each child of school age demands 
a millage seven times as great in Mississippi as in California, and a mill- 
age three times as great in Virginia as in the District of Columbia. 2 Mas- 
sachusetts had 3.28 per cent of the country's wealth in 1912 and 3.17 per 
cent of the country's persons 6 to 20 years of age in 1910. Alabama had 
1.17 per cent of the country's wealth in 1912 and 2.70 per cent of the 
country's persons 6 to 20 years of age in 1920. 3 

The conclusion from such facts is not that we should rush into some 
wild plan to equalize wealth or even to equalize taxation. Tax money 
is hard to get where the per capita wealth is low. The lower this per 
capita wealth, the harder it is to get money by taxation. Practically all 
of our States have used "distributable funds" both as equalization measures 
and as inducements to local units to get worthy educational movements 
started. Such "State Aid" stimulates local educational interest and ex- 
penditures. Grants in aid of education are inducement and incentive to 
States as well as to local educational units within a State. 

Tax Reforms Alone Will Not Solve Problems 

Tax' reform is needed in Pennsylvania and Maine perhaps as badly as in 
South Carolina and Texas. But tax reform in all of the States will not 
of itself do the educational things which need to be done. The problem 
which we face is a far deeper one than tax reform. It is deeper than the 
relative per capita wealth of the States. The educational problem is the 
most fundamental problem of organized society, for on education depends 
the present and the future alike. It can not be left wholly to local initiative 
and control. That idea has been discarded because it failed to get the 
desired results. 4 Unless we are willing to accept the educational situation 
as it is, unless the fact that educational conditions are better than they 
once were is satisfactory to us, we must find some plan of cooperation by 
which the Nation's interest in the development and education of each and 
every person — no matter where he lives — may be realized by and through 
the properly constituted educational authorities of the several States. This 
cooperation must be based on encouragement of the States instead of 

1 Bureau of Education Annual Report for 1916, Vol. 2, p. 6, 

2 Keith and Bagley: The Nation and the Schools, p. 269. 

4 See 'Cubberl'y's Public Education in U. S., pp. 118-152, Chapter on "The Battle for Free 
State Schools." 



68 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

coercion of the States. Without invading the sovereign right of the States 
to control education, we must encourage them to do the necessary things, 
and we must safeguard the expenditures of whatever funds the Federal 
Government allots to the States for specific purposes. 

Conclusions on Federal Aid 

The facts that have been presented picture situations and conditions that 
demand remedial action, that challenge our intelligence and our wealth. 
We are the richest Nation that has ever existed. We have ideals. We 
have been known to use our wealth for the realization of our ideals. Are 
the proposals of the Towner-Sterling Bill in harmony with our American 
ideals? Are they fundamental to national advancement? Are they rea- 
sonably feasible and realizable ? Are they worthy of a small portion of 
our national wealth ? To all of these questions, conscience, judgment, 
and good business sense answer Yes. 

Misinterpretation of the Bill Corrected 

To summarize briefly, we find that the Towner-Sterling Bill — 

1. Does not create a Secretary of Education with autocratic power to 
control public education in the several States. 

2. Does not provide a subsidy plan which by its terms will induce the 
States to surrender their constitutional control over public education. 

3. Does not contemplate, nor render possible, the nationalization of 
education and of the teaching force with a horde of "field inspectors, super- 
visors, and other petty traveling officials." 

4. Does not set up conditions or terms which, lacking definite, specific, 
detailed control, will lead inevitably (or probably) to "tremendous waste 
of Federal funds." 

5. Does not open the door to complete Federal control by laying "a 
very solid superstructure" therefor. 

Correct Interpretation of Towner-Sterling Bill 

Our study and analysis of the Towner-Sterling Bill leads us to the fol- 
lowing interpretation of its provisions, and conclusions : 

1. The Bill creates a Department of Education which will make pos- 
sible the unification of the Government's present educational activities 
under one executive head. 

2. The Bill creates the position of Secretary of Education who becomes 
the educational executive officer of the Nation. 

3. The Secretary of Education is charged with the administration of 
existing laws relative to educational activities of the Federal Government, 
and is given the necessary powers of control in the buildings assigned to 
this Department. 



Relationship of the Federal Government to the States 69 

4. The Secretary of Education is authorized to conduct studies and in- 
vestigations in certain specified fields subject to appropriations made avail- 
able by Congress for these purposes. 

5. The Bill proposes an extension of the principle of Federal aid to the 
States for (a) the removal of illiteracy, (b) the Americanization of the 
foreign-born, (c) the promotion of physical education and health service, 
(d) the training of teachers, and (e) the equalization of educational op- 
portunities. The National benefits that will result from such educational 
work in the States is ample justification for the expenditure. 

6. The control of education (in the sense of specific, definite regulation) 
is left where it now is; viz., with the States. The only conditions 
under which States are to receive Federal aid are set forth clearly in the 
Bill. All implications of Federal control are expressly disclaimed and 
forbidden by the terms of the Bill. 

7. The conditions and terms of the bill have been conceived in good 
faith and are expressed in plain language so that there is little, if any, 
opportunity for misunderstanding. The Federal Government offers Fed- 
eral aid, under definitely stated conditions, to States that will undertake to 
carry, on certain specific types of educational endeavor. The idea is that 
the Federal Government and the States can cooperate in perfect good faith 
in this matter of public education. 

8. The Bill recognizes the fact that every citizen has a dual citizen- 
ship — citizenship in the State and citizenship in the Nation. Between 
these two things, when rightly considered, there can be no fundamental 
conflict. The States control the education of their citizens. These same 
citizens constitute the Nation. The Nation is, therefore, dependent upon 
the education provided by the several States. This dependence is recog- 
nized and a plan of cooperation is proposed. 

9. Under such a cooperative arrangement, a State is entitled to Federal 
aid only in so far as it actually does the things for which it receives aid. 
If it does not perform its duty, a State should not receive Federal aid for 
its failure to live up to its agreements. Such possible cases of bad faith 
are safeguarded against in the Bill. 

10. Under such a cooperative plan, in which good faith is basal, there 
must be opportunity for conference and counsel. Minds must meet, plans 
and procedures must be discussed, not with the idea of coercion, but solely 
with the idea of making the best contagious. The Bill, therefore, provides 
for a National Council on Education in which State educational executives, 
specialists, and laymen shall meet to discuss the promotion and development 
of education in the United States. 

11. Because of the dual form of our governmental relationships, it is of 
the utmost importance that the boys and girls of today should have the 
opportunity to develop the capacity to carry on and carry further the 
civilization of today. Because of the world influence wielded by our 
Nation, the quality of our citizenship has a significance and influence that 



70 The Towner-Sterling Bill 

transcend our own territorial limits. We can not blind our eyes to the 
responsibilities placed upon our Nation by its status in the family of 
nations. 

12. We conclude that a Department of Education can be organized and 
that the principle of Federal aid can be extended to cover the most glaring 
of the defects in our State public school systems without interfering with 
State control of education, and, also, that such cooperation can be carried 
on with a proper safeguarding of the Nation's financial interest in the 
Federal aid provided. This is possible because the Towner-Sterling Bill 
embodies the principle of cooperation between the Federal Government and 
the several States — cooperation in good faith for worthy common benefits. 



APPENDIX 
TOWNER-STERLING BILL 

H. R. 7— S. 1252 

67th CONGRESS 

Introduced in the House by Congressman Horace Mann Towner of Iowa 
Introduced in the Senate by Senator Thomas Sterling of South Dakota 



A BILL 

To create a Department of Education, to authorize appropriations for the conduct 
of said department, to authorize the appropriation of money to encourage the 
States in the promotion and support of education, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States 
of America in Congress assembled, That there is hereby created an executive de- 
partment in the Government to be called the Department of Education, with a 
Secretary of Education, who shall be the head thereof, to be appointed by the 
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and who shall receive 
a salary of $12,000 per annum, and whose tenure of office shall be the same as 
that of the heads of other executive departments; and section 158 of the Revised 
Statutes is hereby amended to include such department, and the provisions of title 
4 of the Revised Statutes, including all amendments thereto, are hereby made 
applicable to said department. The Secretary of Education shall cause a seal 
of office to be made for such department of such device as the President shall ap- 
prove, and judicial notice shall be taken of said seal. 

Sec. 2. That there shall be in said department an Assistant Secretary of Educa- 
tion, to be appointed by the President, who shall receive a salary to be determined 
by Congress. He shall perform such duties as may be prescribed by the Secretary 
or required by law. There shall also be one chief clerk and a disbursing clerk 
and such chiefs of bureaus and clerical assistants as may from time to time be 
authorized by Congress. 

Sec. 3. That there is hereby transferred to the Department of Education the 
Bureau of Education, and such offices, bureaus, divisions, boards, or branches of 
the Government, connected with or attached to any of the executive departments 
or organized independently of any department, as Congress may determine should 
be administered by the Department of Education, and all such offices, bureaus, 
divisions, boards, or branches of the Government so transferred by act of Congress 
shall thereafter be administered by the Department of Education, as hereinafter 
piovided. 

All officers, clerks, and employees employed in or by any office, bureau, division, 
board, or branch of the Government, transferred in accordance with the provisions 
of this Act to the Department of Education, shall each and all be transferred to 
said Department of Education at their existing grades and salaries, except where 
otherwise provided in this Act; and the office records and papers on file pertaining 
exclusively to the business of any such office, bureau, division, board, or branch 
of the Government so transferred, together with the furniture and equipment 
thereof, shall be transferred to said department. 

Sec. 4. That the Secretary of Education shall have charge, in the buildings or 
premises occupied by or assigned to the Department of Education, of the library, 
furniture, fixtures, records, and other property used therein or pertaining thereto, 

[71] 



72 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



and may expend for rental of appropriate quarters for the accommodation of the 
Department of Education within the District of Columbia, and for the library, 
furniture, equipment, and all other incidental expenses, such sums as Congress 
may provide from time to time. 

All power and authority conferred by law upon the head of any executive de- 
partment, or upon any administrative board, over any officer, office, bureau, division, 
board, or branch of the Government, transferred in accordance with the provisions 
of this Act to the Department of Education, shall, after such transfer, be vested 
in the Secretary of Education, and all business arising therefrom or pertaining 
thereto, and all duties performed in connection therewith shall thereafter be ad- 
ministered by the Department of Education. 

All laws prescribing the work and defining the duties and powers of the several 
offices, bureaus, divisions, boards, or branches of the Government, transferred in 
accordance with the provisions of this Act to the Department of Education, shall, 
in so far as the same are not in conflict with the provisions of this Act, remain 
in full force and effect and be administered by the Secretary of Education, to whom 
is hereby granted authority to reorganize the work of any and all of the said 
offices, bureaus, divisions, boards, or branches of the Government so transferred 
in such way as will in his judgment best accomplish the purposes of this Act. 

Sec. 5. That the Department of Education shall conduct studies and investiga- 
tions in the field of education and report thereon. Research shall be undertaken 
in (a) illiteracy; (b) immigrant education; (c) public school education, and 
especially rural education; (d) physicial education, including health education, 
recreation, and sanitation; (e) preparation and supply of competent teachers for 
the public schools; (/) higher education; and in such other fields as, in the judg- 
ment of the Secretary of Education, may require attention and study. 

In order to carry out the provisions of this section the Secretary of Education 
is authorized, in the same manner as provided for appointments in other depart- 
ments, to make appointments, or recommendations of appointments, of educational 
attaches to foreign embassies, and of such investigators and representatives as may 
be needed, subject to the appropriations that have been made or may hereafter 
be made to any office, bureau, division, board, or branch of the Government trans- 
ferred in accordance with the provisions of this Act to the Department of Educa- 
tion; and where appropriations have not been made therefor the appropriation 
provided in section 6 of this Act shall be made available. 

Sec. 6. That for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1922, and annually thereafter, 
the sum of $500,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby authorized 
to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 
to the Department of Education, for the purpose of paying salaries and conducting 
studies and investigations, and paying all incidental and traveling expenses and 
rent where necessary, and for the purpose of enabling the Department of Education 
to carry out the provisions of this Act. And all appropriations which have been 
made and which may hereafter be made to any office, bureau, division, board, or 
branch of the Government, transferred in accordance with the provisions of this 
Act to the Department of Education, are hereby continued in full force and effect, 
and shall be administered by the Secretary of Education in such manner as is 
prescribed by law. 

Sec. 7. In order to encourage the States to remove illiteracy $7,500,000, or so 
much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized to be appropriated annually for 
the instruction of illiterates fourteen years of age and over. Said sum shall be 
apportioned to the States which qualify under the provisions of this Act, in the 
poportions which their respective illiterate populations fourteen years of age and 
over, not including foreign-born illiterates, bear to such total illiterate population 
of the United States, not including outlying possessions, according to the last pre- 
ceding census of the United States. All funds apportioned to a State for the 
removal of illiteracy shall be distributed and administered in accordance with the 
laws of said State in like manner as the funds provided by State and local 



Appendix — Complete Text of Towner-Sterling Bill 73 



authorities for the same purpose, and the State and local educational authorities 
of said State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and methods for carrying 
out the purposes of this section within said State in accordance with the laws 
thereof. 

Sec. 8. That in order to encourage the States in the Americanization of immi- 
grants $7,500,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized to be 
appropriated annually to teach immigrants fourteen years of age and over to 
speak and read the English language and to understand and appreciate the Govern- 
ment of the United States and the duties of citizenship. The said sum shall be 
apportioned to the States which qualify under the provisions of this Act in the 
proportions which their respective foreign-born populations bear to the total 
foreign-born population of the United States, not including outlying possessions, 
according to the last preceding census of the United States. All funds appor- 
tioned to a State for the Americanization of immigrants shall be distributed and 
administered in accordance with the laws of said State in like manner as the 
funds provided by State and local authorities for the same purpose, and the State 
and local educational authorities of said State shall determine the courses of study, 
plans, and methods for carrying out the purposes of this section within said State 
in accordance with the laws thereof. 

Sec. 9. That in order to encourage the States to equalize educational opportuni- 
ties $50,000,000 or so much thereof as may be necessary is authorized to be ap- 
propriated annually to be used in public elementary and secondary schools for the 
partial payment of teachers' salaries, for providing better instruction and extended 
school terms especially in rural schools and schools in sparsely settled localities, 
for the extension and adaptation of public libraries for educational purposes, and 
otherwise providing equally good educational apportunities for the children of 
the several States. The said sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify 
under the provisions of this Act one-half in the proportions which the number 
of children between the ages of six and twenty-one of the respective States bears 
to the total number of such children in the United States, and one-half in the 
proportions which the number of public-school teachers employed in teaching 
positions in the respective States bears to the total number of public-school teachers 
so employed in the United States, not including outlying possessions, said appor- 
tionment to be based upon statistics collected annually by the Department of Edu- 
cation. All funds apportioned to a State to equalize educational opportunities 
shall be distributed and administered in accordance with the laws of said State 
in like manner as the funds provided by State and local authorities for the same 
purpose, and the State and local educational authorities of said State shall de- 
termine the courses of study, plans and methods for carrying out the purposes 
of this section within said State in accordance with the laws thereof: Provided, 
however, That the apportionments authorized by this section shall be made only 
to such States as by law provide: (a) A legal school term of at least twenty-four 
weeks in each year for the benefit of all children of school age in such State; 
(b) A compulsory school attendance law requiring all children between the ages 
of seven and fourteen years to attend some school for at least twenty-four weeks 
in each year; (c) That the English language shall be the basic language of in- 
struction in the common school branches in all schools, public and private: Pro- 
vided, That apportionment may be made under the provisions of this section to 
a State prevented by its constitution from full compliance with the foregoing 
conditions if said conditions are approximated as nearly as constitutional limita- 
tions will permit. 

Sec. 10. That in order to encourage the States in the promotion of physical edu- 
cation, $20,000,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized to be 
appropriated annually for physical education and instruction in the principles of 
health and sanitation. Said sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify 
under the provisions of this Act in the proportions which their respective popula- 
tions bear to the total population of the United States, not including outlying 



74 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



possessions, according to the last preceding census of the United States. All funds 
apportioned to a State for the promotion of physical education shall be distributed 
and administered in accordance with the laws of said State in like manner as the 
funds provided by State and local authorities for the same purpose, and the State 
and local educational authorities of said State shall determine the courses of study, 
plans, and methods for carrying out the purposes of this section within said State 
in accordance with the laws thereof. 

Sec. 11. That in order to encourage the States in the preparation of teachers 
for public-school service, $15,000,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is 
authorized to be appropriated annually to provide and extend facilities for the 
improvement of teachers in service and for the more adequate preparation of 
prospective teachers, and to provide an increased number of trained and compe- 
tent teachers by encouraging through the establishment of scholarships and other- 
wise a greater number of talented young persons to make adequate preparation 
for public-school service. The said sum shall be apportioned to the States which 
qualify under the provisions of this Act in the proportions which the number of 
public-school teachers employed in teaching positions in the respective States bear 
to the total number of public-school teachers so employed in the United States, 
not including outlying possessions, said apportionments to be based on statistics 
collected annually by the Department of Education. All funds apportioned to a 
State for the preparation of teachers for public-school service shall be distributed 
and administered in accordance with the laws of said State in like manner as 
the funds provided by State and local authorities for the same purpose, and the 
State and local educational authorities of said State shall determine the courses 
of study, plans, and methods for carrying out the purposes of this section within 
said State in accordance with the laws thereof. 

Sec. 12. That in order to receive apportionment from one or more of the ap- 
propriations authorized in sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 of this Act a State shall by 
legislative enactment accept the provisions of this Act and provide for the dis- 
tribution and administration of such funds as shall be apportioned to said State, 
and shall designate the State's chief educational authority, whether a State superin- 
tendent of public instruction, a commissioner of education, a State board of educa- 
tion, or other legally constituted chief educational authority, to represent said State 
in the administration of this Act, and such authority so designated shall be recog- 
nized by the Secretary of Education: Provided, That in any State in which the 
legislature does not meet within one year after the passage of this Act, the Governor 
of said State, in so far as he may have authority so to do, may take such action, 
temporarily, as is herein provided to be taken by legislative enactment in order 
,to secure the benefits of this Act, and such action by the Governor shall be recog- 
nized by the Secretary of Education for the purposes of this Act until the legislature 
of said State shall have met in due course and been in session sixty days. 

In any State accepting the provisions of this Act the State Treasurer shall be 
designated and appointed as custodian of all funds received by said State as ap- 
portionments under the provisions of this Act, to receive and provide for the proper 
custody and disbursement of the same, such disbursements to be made in accordance 
with the legal provisions of said State. 

A State may accept the provisions of any one or more of the respective appor- 
tionments authorized in sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 of this Act, and may defer the 
acceptance of any one or more of said apportionments: Provided, however, That 
no money shall be apportioned to any State from any of the funds authorized to 
be appropriated by sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 of this Act, unless a sum at least 
equally as large shall be provided by said State, or by local authorities, or by both, 
for the same purpose: And provided further, That the sum or sums provided by 
the State and local authorities for the equalization of educational opportunities, 
for the promotion of physical education, and for the preparation of teachers shall 
not be less for any year than the amount provided for the same purpose for the 
fiscal year next preceding the acceptance of the provisions of this Act by said 



Appendix — Complete Text of Towner-Sterling Bill 75 



State: And provided further, That no money apportioned to a State under any 
of the provisions of this Act shall be used by any State or local authority, directly 
or indirectly, for the purchase, rental, erection, preservation, or repair of any 
building or equipment, or for the purchase or rental of land, or for the payment of 
debts or the interest thereon. 

Sec. 13. That when a State shall have accepted the provisions of this Act and 
.shall have provided for the distribution and administration of such funds as shall 
be apportioned to said State, and when the State's chief educational authority 
designated to represent said State shall so report in writing to the Secretary of 
Education, and said report shall be approved by the Governor of said State, show- 
ing that said State has complied with the provisions of this Act with respect to 
any one or more of the apportionments authorized in sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 
of this Act, and when annually thereafter a like report shall be filed with the 
Secretary of Education, approved by the Governor of said State, the Secretary of 
Education shall apportion to said State for the ensuing fiscal year such funds as 
said State may be entitled to receive under the provisions of this Act, and shall 
certify such apportionment or apportionments to the Secretary of the Treasury: 
Provided, That all the educational facilities encouraged by the provisions of this 
Act and accepted by a State shall be organized, supervised, and administered ex- 
clusively by the legally constituted State and local educational authorities of said 
State, and the Secretary of Education shall exercise no authority in relation thereto ; 
and this Act shall not be construed to imply Federal control of education within 
the States, nor to impair the freedom of the States in the conduct and management 
of their respective school systems. 

Sec. 14. That the Secretary of Education is authorized to prescribe plans for 
keeping accounts of the expenditures of such funds as may be apportioned to the 
States under the provisions of this Act and to audit such accounts. If the Secretary 
of Education shall determine that the apportionment or apportionments made to 
a State for the current fiscal year are not being expended in accordance with the 
provisions of this Act, he shall give notice in writing to the chief educational 
authority designated to represent said State, and to the Governor of said State, 
in duplicate, stating specifically wherein said State fails to comply with the pro- 
visions of this Act. If after being so notified a State fails to comply with the 
provisions of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall report thereon to Congress 
not later than in his next annual report. 

If any portion of the money received by the Treasurer of a State, under the 
provisions of this Act, for any of the purposes herein named shall, by action or 
contingency, be diminished or lost, the same shall be replaced by said State, and 
until so replaced no subsequent apportionment for such purpose shall be made 
to said State. If any part of the funds apportioned annually to any State for any 
of the purposes named in sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 of this Act has not been ex- 
pended for such purpose, a sum equal to such unexpended part shall be deducted 
from the next succeeding annual apportionment made to said State for such 
purpose. 

Sec. 15. That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed 
to pay quarterly to the Treasurer of each State such apportionment or apportion- 
ments as the Secretary of Education shall certify that said State is entitled to 
receive under the provisions of this Act. 

Sec. 16. That the chief educational authority designated to represent a State 
receiving any of the apportionments made under the provisions of this Act shall, 
not later than September 1 of each year, make a report to the Secretary of Edu- 
cation showing the work done in said State in carrying out the provisions of this 
Act during the next preceding fiscal year, and the receipts and expenditures of 
money apportioned to said State under the provisions of this Act. If the chief 
educational authority designated to represent a State shall fail to report as herein 
provided, the Secretary of Education may discontinue all apportionments to said 
State until such report shall have been made. 



76 The Towner-Sterling Bill 



Sec. 17. That there is hereby created a National Council on Education to consult 
and advise with the Secretary of Education on subjects relating to the promotion 
and development of education in the United States. The Secretary of Education 
shall be chairman of said council, which shall be constituted as follows: (a) The 
chief educational authority of each State designated to represent said State in the 
administration of this Act; (b) not to exceed twenty-five educators representing 
the different interests in education, to be appointed annually by the Secretary of _ 
Education; (c) not to exceed twenty-five persons, not educators, interested in the 
results of education from the standpoint of the public, to be appointed annually by 
the Secretary of Education. Said council shall meet for conference once each 
year at the call of the Secretary of Education. The members shall serve without 
pay, but their actual expenses incurred in attending the conferences called by the 
Secretary of Education shall be paid by the Department of Education. 

Sec. 18. That the Secretary of Education shall annually at the close of each 
fiscal year make a report in writing to Congress giving an account of all moneys 
received and disbursed by the Department of Education and describing the work 
done by the department. He shall also, not later than December 1 of each year, 
make a report to Congress on the administration of sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 
13, 14, IS, 16, and 17 of this Act, and shall include in said report a summary of 
the reports made to him by the several States showing the administration of this 
Act therein, and shall at the same time make such recommendations to Congress as 
will, in his judgment, improve public education in the United States. He shall 
also from time to time make such special investigations and reports as may be 
required of him by the President or by Congress. 

Sec. 19. That this Act shall take effect upon its passage, and all acts or parts of 
Acts in conflict with this Act are hereby repealed. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS • 

020 975 563 4 



Holling 
pH 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0J320 975 563 4 • 



